On Fri, Mar 03, 2017 at 09:42:10AM -0800, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> All that's why I consider systemd so insidious. It forces you to use it
> whether you want to or not. Something Microsoft has been doing to
> their users for decades. ;-)
You started this thread with
> I don't like systemd (why
On Sat, 4 Mar 2017 22:15:18 +0100 didier gaumet
wrote:
> Le 04/03/2017 à 16:19, Patrick Bartek a écrit :
>
> > I'm aware of Devuan and tested it in VirtualBox.
> [...]
> > also looked at AntiX and mx-16. They are systemd free, too, but as
> > with Devuan both are based on Jessie..
> [...]
>
>
Le 04/03/2017 à 16:19, Patrick Bartek a écrit :
> I'm aware of Devuan and tested it in VirtualBox.
[...]
> also looked at AntiX and mx-16. They are systemd free, too, but as with
> Devuan both are based on Jessie..
[...]
last stable version available, five years support and systemd-free but
not
GiaThnYgeia wrote:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AntiX
>
> [antiX is a Linux distribution, originally based on MEPIS, which itself
> is based on the Debian stable distribution. It initially replaced the
> MEPIS KDE desktop environment with the Fluxbox and IceWM window
> managers, making it suitab
On Sat, 04 Mar 2017 11:38:00 + GiaThnYgeia
wrote:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AntiX
>
> [antiX is a Linux distribution, originally based on MEPIS, which
> [snip]
Aware of it. Also mx-16 is a systemd-free distro put together by former
Mepis and AntiX people. Unfortuantely, both are bas
On Fri, 3 Mar 2017 22:24:46 +0100 (CET) Aquarius
wrote:
> Maybe Devuan would meet your requirements of using the init system
> you would like to use. It is not on Stretch yet but on Jessie.
I'm aware of Devuan and tested it in VirtualBox. At the
time ( a year ago), it was still pretty rough aro
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AntiX
[antiX is a Linux distribution, originally based on MEPIS, which itself
is based on the Debian stable distribution. It initially replaced the
MEPIS KDE desktop environment with the Fluxbox and IceWM window
managers, making it suitable for older, less powerful x8
Maybe Devuan would meet your requirements of using the init system you would
like to use. It is not on Stretch yet but on Jessie.
--
Securely sent with Tutanota. Claim your encrypted mailbox today!
https://tutanota.com
3. Mar 2017 20:21 by wande...@fastmail.fm:
> On 2017-03-03 at 13:00, Reco w
On 2017-03-03 at 13:00, Reco wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Fri, 03 Mar 2017 07:25:13 -0500
> The Wanderer wrote:
>
>> systemd as the init system is provided by the systemd-sysv package. I
>> have that package pinned to never install in /etc/preferences:
>>
>> Package: systemd-sysv
>> Pin: version
On 2017-03-03 at 12:42, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> On Fri, 03 Mar 2017 07:25:13 -0500 The Wanderer
> wrote:
>
>> On 2017-03-02 at 13:01, Patrick Bartek wrote:
>>
>>> I've been considering Stretch as a clean install or dist-upgrade
>>> of my aging Wheezy desktop setup as well as to install on a new
Hi.
On Fri, 03 Mar 2017 07:25:13 -0500
The Wanderer wrote:
> systemd as the init system is provided by the systemd-sysv package. I
> have that package pinned to never install in /etc/preferences:
>
> Package: systemd-sysv
> Pin: version *
> Pin-Priority: -1
>
> but this doesn't seem to
On Fri, 03 Mar 2017 07:25:13 -0500 The Wanderer
wrote:
> On 2017-03-02 at 13:01, Patrick Bartek wrote:
>
> > I've been considering Stretch as a clean install or dist-upgrade of
> > my aging Wheezy desktop setup as well as to install on a new
> > notebook I've yet to decide on. I don't like syst
On Thu, 2 Mar 2017 21:47:05 +0100 wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 10:01:17AM -0800, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > I've been considering Stretch as a clean install or dist-upgrade of
> > my aging Wheezy desktop setup as well as to install on a new
On 2017-03-02 at 13:01, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> I've been considering Stretch as a clean install or dist-upgrade of
> my aging Wheezy desktop setup as well as to install on a new notebook
> I've yet to decide on. I don't like systemd (why is unimportant to
> this query). I plan to use some other
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 10:01:17AM -0800, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> I've been considering Stretch as a clean install or dist-upgrade of my
> aging Wheezy desktop setup as well as to install on a new notebook I've
> yet to decide on. I don't like systemd
I've been considering Stretch as a clean install or dist-upgrade of my
aging Wheezy desktop setup as well as to install on a new notebook I've
yet to decide on. I don't like systemd (why is unimportant to this
query). I plan to use some other init system, probably runit. So ...
Just how dependen
On Wed, 10 Dec 2014, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Ma, 09 dec 14, 18:48:54, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> >
> > What patterns did you see?
> >
> > What claims did I make? What a lot of Debian server admins think of
> > systemd? A rhetorical statement. A lot of Debian server admins
> > don't like syste
On Ma, 09 dec 14, 18:48:54, Patrick Bartek wrote:
>
> What patterns did you see?
>
> What claims did I make? What a lot of Debian server admins think of
> systemd? A rhetorical statement. A lot of Debian server admins
> don't like systemd to put it mildly. They said so -- explicitly -- with
>
On Sun, 07 Dec 2014, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Sb, 06 dec 14, 13:56:34, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > On Sat, 06 Dec 2014, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> >
> > > On Lu, 01 dec 14, 23:05:09, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Well, we already know what a lot of Debian server admins think
> > > > of syst
On Wed, Dec 03, 2014 at 10:15:24AM -0500, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>
> It IS accurate to say that after Jessie is released as stable. Jessie
No. 'Jessie is frozen *until* it is released as stable.
> has been frozen, and only RC fixes are being made. This is not
> considered an RC fix.
That link I
On Sb, 06 dec 14, 13:56:34, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> On Sat, 06 Dec 2014, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
>
> > On Lu, 01 dec 14, 23:05:09, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > >
> > > Well, we already know what a lot of Debian server admins think of
> > > systemd.
> >
> > Care to back this up with some data?
>
>
On 12/06/2014 04:56 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote:
On Sat, 06 Dec 2014, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
On Lu, 01 dec 14, 23:05:09, Patrick Bartek wrote:
Well, we already know what a lot of Debian server admins think of
systemd.
Care to back this up with some data?
Why? You've read this list regarding
On Sat, 06 Dec 2014, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Lu, 01 dec 14, 23:05:09, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> >
> > Well, we already know what a lot of Debian server admins think of
> > systemd.
>
> Care to back this up with some data?
Why? You've read this list regarding systemd and Debian same as I.
Su
On Sb, 06 dec 14, 20:40:21, Erwan David wrote:
> Le 06/12/2014 15:19, Andrei POPESCU a écrit :
> > On Lu, 01 dec 14, 23:05:09, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> >> Well, we already know what a lot of Debian server admins think of
> >> systemd.
> > Care to back this up with some data?
> >
> They may think o
On 12/06/2014 02:40 PM, Erwan David wrote:
Le 06/12/2014 15:19, Andrei POPESCU a écrit :
On Lu, 01 dec 14, 23:05:09, Patrick Bartek wrote:
Well, we already know what a lot of Debian server admins think of
systemd.
Care to back this up with some data?
Kind regards,
Andrei
They may think of sy
Le 06/12/2014 15:19, Andrei POPESCU a écrit :
> On Lu, 01 dec 14, 23:05:09, Patrick Bartek wrote:
>> Well, we already know what a lot of Debian server admins think of
>> systemd.
> Care to back this up with some data?
>
> Kind regards,
> Andrei
They may think of systemd saying "were is this M%µ£i
On Ma, 02 dec 14, 16:52:46, Miles Fidelman wrote:
>
> Well, actually, it does involve a little more than downloading debootstrap,
> applying the patch, and compiling.
As Brian already said, debootstrap is just a bunch of scripts, so no
compiling involved.
> One has to build a custom copy of d-i
On Lu, 01 dec 14, 23:05:09, Patrick Bartek wrote:
>
> Well, we already know what a lot of Debian server admins think of
> systemd.
Care to back this up with some data?
Kind regards,
Andrei
--
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers:
htt
On 12/04/2014 03:16 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote:
On Thursday 04 December 2014 19:41:44 Brad Rogers wrote:
On Thu, 4 Dec 2014 18:48:31 +
Brian wrote:
Hello Brian,
It probably also makes my behaviour stupid. But stupidity is in short
supply as you two have a monopoly on it and it doesn't look lik
On 12/04/2014 12:33 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote:
On Wed, 03 Dec 2014, Brad Rogers wrote:
On Wed, 3 Dec 2014 09:24:03 -0800
Patrick Bartek wrote:
Hello Patrick,
use and no one else's, why distribute it at all?
Simple: Ego.
Perhaps. Or insecurity, and the need for validation. Or arroganc
On Thu, 4 Dec 2014 20:16:16 +
Lisi Reisz wrote:
Hello Lisi,
>No, this is what had started that part of the thread:
I meant from where I chipped in. Sorry I didn't make it clear.
--
Regards _
/ ) "The blindingly obvious is
/ _)radnever immediately appa
On Thursday 04 December 2014 19:41:44 Brad Rogers wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Dec 2014 18:48:31 +
> Brian wrote:
>
> Hello Brian,
>
> >It probably also makes my behaviour stupid. But stupidity is in short
> >supply as you two have a monopoly on it and it doesn't look like you
> >you are going to do any
On Thu, 4 Dec 2014 18:48:31 +
Brian wrote:
Hello Brian,
>It probably also makes my behaviour stupid. But stupidity is in short
>supply as you two have a monopoly on it and it doesn't look like you
>you are going to do any sharing.
We were talking about a subset of developers, not *all* of t
On Thu 04 Dec 2014 at 09:33:30 -0800, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Dec 2014, Brad Rogers wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 3 Dec 2014 09:24:03 -0800
> > Patrick Bartek wrote:
> >
> > Hello Patrick,
> >
> > >use and no one else's, why distribute it at all?
> >
> > Simple: Ego.
> >
>
> Perhaps. Or
On Wed, 03 Dec 2014, Brad Rogers wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Dec 2014 09:24:03 -0800
> Patrick Bartek wrote:
>
> Hello Patrick,
>
> >use and no one else's, why distribute it at all?
>
> Simple: Ego.
>
Perhaps. Or insecurity, and the need for validation. Or arrogance.
Or all the above.
B
--
To
On Tue, 02 Dec 2014, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote:
>
>
> Le 02.12.2014 08:05, Patrick Bartek a écrit :
>
> >> >> > and more and more
> >> >> > developers will start writing apps with systemd, or parts of
> >> it,
> >> >> > as a dependency for the "features" it offers.
> >>
> >> It's the
On Wed, 3 Dec 2014 09:24:03 -0800
Patrick Bartek wrote:
Hello Patrick,
>use and no one else's, why distribute it at all?
Simple: Ego.
--
Regards _
/ ) "The blindingly obvious is
/ _)radnever immediately apparent"
I'll be the paint on the side if you'll be
On Tue, 02 Dec 2014, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> On Tuesday 02 December 2014 07:05:09 Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > User's do contrain. They even dictate. Always have. Developers
> > should, if they are samrt, be developing what customers want or
> > need. Not the other way around. That's the formula for g
On 12/3/2014 9:38 AM, The Wanderer wrote:
> On 12/03/2014 at 07:43 AM, Chris Bannister wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 05:15:36PM -0800, Patrick Bartek wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 30 Nov 2014, Chris Bannister wrote:
>
Nothing is final yet, jessie is still a moving target IOW not
yet stabl
On 12/03/2014 at 07:43 AM, Chris Bannister wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 05:15:36PM -0800, Patrick Bartek wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 30 Nov 2014, Chris Bannister wrote:
>>> Nothing is final yet, jessie is still a moving target IOW not
>>> yet stable, so not just semantics.
>>
>> Yes. Semantics. J
On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 05:15:36PM -0800, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Nov 2014, Chris Bannister wrote:
>
> > [I've somehow deleted the other messages, so this one will have to do]
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 01:59:02PM +0100, Jochen Spieker wrote:
> > > Patrick Bartek:
> > > > On Thu,
On Tue 02 Dec 2014 at 18:37:04 -0500, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> Brian wrote:
> >On Tue 02 Dec 2014 at 16:52:46 -0500, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> >
> >>Brian wrote:
> >>>On Wed 03 Dec 2014 at 02:27:26 +1100, Scott Ferguson wrote:
> >>>
> >Do you have a citation for this?
> I'm glad you asked.
>
Brian wrote:
On Tue 02 Dec 2014 at 16:52:46 -0500, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Brian wrote:
On Wed 03 Dec 2014 at 02:27:26 +1100, Scott Ferguson wrote:
Do you have a citation for this?
I'm glad you asked.
No - I "presumed" that amongst the "lots" of experts so opposed to the
late-command option,
On Tue 02 Dec 2014 at 16:52:46 -0500, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> Brian wrote:
> >On Wed 03 Dec 2014 at 02:27:26 +1100, Scott Ferguson wrote:
> >
> >>>Do you have a citation for this?
> >>I'm glad you asked.
> >>No - I "presumed" that amongst the "lots" of experts so opposed to the
> >>late-command op
Brian wrote:
On Wed 03 Dec 2014 at 02:27:26 +1100, Scott Ferguson wrote:
Do you have a citation for this?
I'm glad you asked.
No - I "presumed" that amongst the "lots" of experts so opposed to the
late-command option, at least one of them would apply Kenshi's patch
(which apparently works) to
On 12/02/2014 02:34 AM, Stephan Seitz wrote:
Debian has kindled a big fire with this systemd crap. It’s time to jump
ship before you only have ashes.
Shade and sweet water!
Stephan
yes! Yes! RUNAWAY!! :) Ric
--
My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say:
"There are two Great Sins in
On Wed 03 Dec 2014 at 02:27:26 +1100, Scott Ferguson wrote:
> > Do you have a citation for this?
>
> I'm glad you asked.
> No - I "presumed" that amongst the "lots" of experts so opposed to the
> late-command option, at least one of them would apply Kenshi's patch
> (which apparently works) to d-
On 3 December 2014 at 01:36, The Wanderer wrote:
> On 12/02/2014 at 07:23 AM, Scott Ferguson wrote:
>
>> On 2 December 2014 at 18:05, Patrick Bartek
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 02 Dec 2014, Scott Ferguson wrote:
>
Depends on what 'you' call "*default*". It implies a choice - as
opposed to
On 3 December 2014 at 01:18, Joel Rees wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 9:23 PM, Scott Ferguson
> wrote:
>> On 2 December 2014 at 18:05, Patrick Bartek wrote:
>>> On Tue, 02 Dec 2014, Scott Ferguson wrote:
>>>
On 2 December 2014 at 08:18, Patrick Bartek
wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Dec 201
On 2 December 2014 at 23:53, Joel Rees wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 9:04 PM, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
>> Le Mon, 1 Dec 2014 23:05:09 -0800,
>> Patrick Bartek a écrit :
>>
>>> On Tue, 02 Dec 2014, Scott Ferguson wrote:
>>>
>>> > On 2 December 2014 at 08:18, Patrick Bartek
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
On 12/02/2014 at 07:23 AM, Scott Ferguson wrote:
> On 2 December 2014 at 18:05, Patrick Bartek
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 02 Dec 2014, Scott Ferguson wrote:
>>> Depends on what 'you' call "*default*". It implies a choice - as
>>> opposed to "*mandatory*".
>>
>> You do have a choice, but ONLY after
On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 9:23 PM, Scott Ferguson
wrote:
> On 2 December 2014 at 18:05, Patrick Bartek wrote:
>> On Tue, 02 Dec 2014, Scott Ferguson wrote:
>>
>>> On 2 December 2014 at 08:18, Patrick Bartek
>>> wrote:
>>> > On Mon, 01 Dec 2014, Ric Moore wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> On 11/30/2014 11:27 PM,
Le 02.12.2014 08:05, Patrick Bartek a écrit :
>> > and more and more
>> > developers will start writing apps with systemd, or parts of
it,
>> > as a dependency for the "features" it offers.
It's their choice - likewise it's your choice *not* to write
alternatives. It 'sounds' like you're pr
On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 9:04 PM, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
> Le Mon, 1 Dec 2014 23:05:09 -0800,
> Patrick Bartek a écrit :
>
>> On Tue, 02 Dec 2014, Scott Ferguson wrote:
>>
>> > On 2 December 2014 at 08:18, Patrick Bartek
>> > wrote:
>> > > On Mon, 01 Dec 2014, Ric Moore wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> On
On 2 December 2014 at 18:05, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> On Tue, 02 Dec 2014, Scott Ferguson wrote:
>
>> On 2 December 2014 at 08:18, Patrick Bartek
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon, 01 Dec 2014, Ric Moore wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 11/30/2014 11:27 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote:
>> >>
>> [snip]
>>
>> > > > as the default
Le Mon, 1 Dec 2014 23:05:09 -0800,
Patrick Bartek a écrit :
> On Tue, 02 Dec 2014, Scott Ferguson wrote:
>
> > On 2 December 2014 at 08:18, Patrick Bartek
> > wrote:
> > > On Mon, 01 Dec 2014, Ric Moore wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 11/30/2014 11:27 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > >>
> > [snip]
> >
> >
On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 11:49:15AM +0100, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
> Le Mon, 01 Dec 2014 13:45:12 -0500,
> Miles Fidelman a écrit :
>
> > Ric Moore wrote:
> > > On 11/30/2014 11:27 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > >
> > >> I fear that once systemd is firmly entrenched in Debian as the
> > >> defaul
Le Mon, 01 Dec 2014 13:45:12 -0500,
Miles Fidelman a écrit :
> Ric Moore wrote:
> > On 11/30/2014 11:27 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> >
> >> I fear that once systemd is firmly entrenched in Debian as the
> >> default init more distros will follow suit, and more and more
> >> developers will start w
On Tuesday 02 December 2014 07:05:09 Patrick Bartek wrote:
> User's do contrain. They even dictate. Always have. Developers
> should, if they are samrt, be developing what customers want or need.
> Not the other way around. That's the formula for going out of business.
> Listening to your custom
On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 01:18:39PM -0800, Patrick Bartek wrote:
Last time I checked -- two or three weeks ago -- only 6 distros
besides Jessie were using systemd as the default: Fedora 15,
RHEL 7, CentOS 7, Arch, OpenSUSE, and SUSE Server. Just read today
Only SUSE Server 12 uses systemd, but
On Tue, 02 Dec 2014, Scott Ferguson wrote:
> On 2 December 2014 at 08:18, Patrick Bartek
> wrote:
> > On Mon, 01 Dec 2014, Ric Moore wrote:
> >
> >> On 11/30/2014 11:27 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> >>
> [snip]
>
> > > > as the
> >> > default init more distros will follow suit,
>
> Very few do no
On Mon, 01 Dec 2014, Ric Moore wrote:
> On 12/01/2014 04:18 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > On Mon, 01 Dec 2014, Ric Moore wrote:
> >
> >> On 11/30/2014 11:27 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> >>
> >>> I fear that once systemd is firmly entrenched in Debian as the
> >>> default init more distros will foll
On 2 December 2014 at 08:18, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Dec 2014, Ric Moore wrote:
>
>> On 11/30/2014 11:27 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote:
>>
>> > I fear that once
If?
> > >systemd is firmly entrenched in Debian
? Perl might be, but it seems a little hyperbolic to say systemd is
(anymore the
On 12/01/2014 04:18 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote:
On Mon, 01 Dec 2014, Ric Moore wrote:
On 11/30/2014 11:27 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote:
I fear that once systemd is firmly entrenched in Debian as the
default init more distros will follow suit, and more and more
developers will start writing apps wit
On Monday 01 December 2014 21:18:39 Patrick Bartek wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Dec 2014, Ric Moore wrote:
> > On 11/30/2014 11:27 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > > I fear that once systemd is firmly entrenched in Debian as the
> > > default init more distros will follow suit, and more and more
> > > develope
On Mon, 01 Dec 2014, Ric Moore wrote:
> On 11/30/2014 11:27 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote:
>
> > I fear that once systemd is firmly entrenched in Debian as the
> > default init more distros will follow suit, and more and more
> > developers will start writing apps with systemd, or parts of it, as
> >
Ric Moore wrote:
On 11/30/2014 11:27 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote:
I fear that once systemd is firmly entrenched in Debian as the default
init more distros will follow suit, and more and more developers will
start writing apps with systemd, or parts of it, as a dependency
for the "features" it offe
On 11/30/2014 11:27 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote:
I fear that once systemd is firmly entrenched in Debian as the default
init more distros will follow suit, and more and more developers will
start writing apps with systemd, or parts of it, as a dependency
for the "features" it offers.
Every other
On Sun, 30 Nov 2014, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> Patrick Bartek wrote:
>
> > [big snip]
> > As for me, Wheezy is working fine, and I have no plans of
> > dist-upgrading to Jessie, or even clean installing it other than as
> > a learning experience. I'm going to see what transpires with the
> > release
changes. Maybe,
the release after Jessie will have the option to pick your init system.
Just be grateful the support for REPLACING systemd with sysvinit is
available and easy to do.
There are work-arounds for dist-upgrading to Jessie without installing
systemd as the init, but you'll still
On 01/12/14 01:15, Patrick Bartek wrote:
There are work-arounds for dist-upgrading to Jessie without installing
systemd as the init, but you'll still have systemd dependencies
(libraries usually) for software like GNOME3 or cups or udev to
deal with. And you'll have to be on guard that some app d
0151.html
>
Aware of this from other sources, but mostly pointless now as
Testing/Jessie was frozen 5 Nov. So, no major changes. Maybe,
the release after Jessie will have the option to pick your init system.
Just be grateful the support for REPLACING systemd with sysvinit is
available and ea
[I've somehow deleted the other messages, so this one will have to do]
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 01:59:02PM +0100, Jochen Spieker wrote:
> Patrick Bartek:
> > On Thu, 27 Nov 2014, John Hasler wrote:
> >> Patrick Bartek writes:
> >>
> >>> It seems systemd cannot not be installed in Jessie.
> >> You m
On Thu, 27 Nov 2014, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Nov 2014, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > Now the strange thing: I've done some research, and it seems that
> > all the init replacement procedures start with first replacing
> > systemd with sysvinit, then proceeding wi
On 11/27/2014 at 11:08 PM, Chris Bannister wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 10:10:23PM -0500, The Wanderer wrote:
>
>> On 11/27/2014 at 09:33 PM, John Hasler wrote:
>>
>>> Patrick Bartek writes:
>>>
It seems systemd cannot not be installed in Jessie.
>>>
>>> You mean Testing. Jessie has
Patrick Bartek:
> On Thu, 27 Nov 2014, John Hasler wrote:
>> Patrick Bartek writes:
>>
>>> It seems systemd cannot not be installed in Jessie.
>> You mean Testing. Jessie has not been released.
> Semantics.
Ah, my favorite movie quote:
"I'm offering you my body and you're offering me semantics!"
On Thu, 27 Nov 2014, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> Now the strange thing: I've done some research, and it seems that all
> the init replacement procedures start with first replacing systemd
> with sysvinit, then proceeding with replacing sysvinit with the
> desired init. Anyone have inf
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 10:10:23PM -0500, The Wanderer wrote:
> On 11/27/2014 at 09:33 PM, John Hasler wrote:
>
> > Patrick Bartek writes:
> >
> >> It seems systemd cannot not be installed in Jessie.
> >
> > You mean Testing. Jessie has not been released.
>
> My understanding of the way the De
On Thu, 27 Nov 2014, John Hasler wrote:
> Patrick Bartek writes:
> > It seems systemd cannot not be installed in Jessie.
>
> You mean Testing. Jessie has not been released.
Semantics.
B
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Troub
On 11/27/2014 at 09:33 PM, John Hasler wrote:
> Patrick Bartek writes:
>
>> It seems systemd cannot not be installed in Jessie.
>
> You mean Testing. Jessie has not been released.
My understanding of the way the Debian release codenames work / are used
is that current testing (AKA "the current
Patrick Bartek writes:
> It seems systemd cannot not be installed in Jessie.
You mean Testing. Jessie has not been released.
--
John Hasler
jhas...@newsguy.com
Elmwood, WI USA
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
acement process.
Now the strange thing: I've done some research, and it seems that all the init
replacement procedures start with first replacing systemd with sysvinit, then
proceeding with replacing sysvinit with the desired init. Anyone have info or
instructions to the contrary? I'
On 05/03/14 11:34, Rob Owens wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 11:07:00AM +1100, Scott Ferguson wrote:
>> On 05/03/14 10:36, Rob Owens wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 01:52:19PM +, Darac Marjal wrote:
Boot speed isn't systemd's goal. It's just a side-effect.
Systemd's real goa
On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 11:07:00AM +1100, Scott Ferguson wrote:
> On 05/03/14 10:36, Rob Owens wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 01:52:19PM +, Darac Marjal wrote:
> >> Boot speed isn't systemd's goal. It's just a side-effect.
> >>
> >> Systemd's real goals are being event driven (so, for exam
On 05/03/14 10:36, Rob Owens wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 01:52:19PM +, Darac Marjal wrote:
>> Boot speed isn't systemd's goal. It's just a side-effect.
>>
>> Systemd's real goals are being event driven (so, for example, you
>> don't mount a file system until the device is ready - at the
>
On Ma, 04 mar 14, 11:58:42, Pertti Kosunen wrote:
> On 4.3.2014 11:16, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> >The decision was just about *the default*. (Is this so difficult to crasp?)
>
> When is this change coming to unstable?
The sysvinit package (Essential: yes) has been transformed into a
metapackag
On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 01:52:19PM +, Darac Marjal wrote:
> Boot speed isn't systemd's goal. It's just a side-effect.
>
> Systemd's real goals are being event driven (so, for example, you don't
> mount a file system until the device is ready - at the moment, debian
> does this with a two-pass
On 03/04/2014 10:00 AM, Steve Litt of
Troubleshooters.Com wrote:
The decision was just about *the default*. (Is this so difficult to
> crasp?)
Yes, it *was* hard for me to grasp. Reading all the email, I didn't
understand that I'd still have a
On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 09:37:57AM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Mar 2014 22:31:08 -0500
> Dan Ritter wrote:
> > I would strongly consider a hybrid of the existing sysVinit and
> > daemontools or runit -- runit being a reimplementation of daemontools
> > that avoided the licensing issue and
On Tue, 04 Mar 2014 10:16:35 +0100
Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> At least for Jessie as far as I understand all other inits are still
> planned to be packaged. So either stick with sysv + insserv or choose
> another one.
>
> The decision was just about *the default*. (Is this so difficult to
> cr
On Mon, 3 Mar 2014 22:31:08 -0500
Dan Ritter wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 08:50:09PM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > I just checked with my local Linux group (GoLUG), and the opinions
> > there are that systemd is not a particularly good thing. I also
> > heard from our LUG
On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 08:06:59AM -0500, Rob Owens wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 08:50:09PM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > I just checked with my local Linux group (GoLUG), and the opinions
> > there are that systemd is not a particularly good thing. I also heard
> > from ou
On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 08:50:09PM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I just checked with my local Linux group (GoLUG), and the opinions
> there are that systemd is not a particularly good thing. I also heard
> from our LUG's most vociferous proponent of Daemontools that Daemontools
> wou
On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 08:50:09PM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I just checked with my local Linux group (GoLUG), and the opinions
> there are that systemd is not a particularly good thing. I also heard
> from our LUG's most vociferous proponent of Daemontools that Daemontools
> wou
On 4.3.2014 11:16, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
The decision was just about *the default*. (Is this so difficult to crasp?)
When is this change coming to unstable? Will it need any special actions
when upgrading?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject
Am Montag, 3. März 2014, 20:50:09 schrieb Steve Litt:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I just checked with my local Linux group (GoLUG), and the opinions
> there are that systemd is not a particularly good thing. I also heard
> from our LUG's most vociferous proponent of Daemontools that Daemontools
> wouldn't
On Tue, 04 Mar 2014 04:07:33 +0100
Jerome BENOIT wrote:
>
>
> On 04/03/14 02:50, Steve Litt wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > I just checked with my local Linux group (GoLUG), and the opinions
> > there are that systemd is not a particularly good thing. I also
> > heard from our LUG's most vocif
On 04/03/14 02:50, Steve Litt wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I just checked with my local Linux group (GoLUG), and the opinions
> there are that systemd is not a particularly good thing. I also heard
> from our LUG's most vociferous proponent of Daemontools that Daemontools
> wouldn't be a good repla
Hi everyone,
I just checked with my local Linux group (GoLUG), and the opinions
there are that systemd is not a particularly good thing. I also heard
from our LUG's most vociferous proponent of Daemontools that Daemontools
wouldn't be a good replacement because it has no concept of running
things
99 matches
Mail list logo
