-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Ian Jackson writes (Amendment (Re: Re-Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of
init systems)):
For the avoidance of any doubt, I currently intend to not accept any
further amendments. That means that the minimum discussion period
will not be
Hi,
Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk writes:
Ian Jackson writes (Amendment (Re: Re-Proposal - preserve freedom of choice
of init systems)):
For the avoidance of any doubt, I currently intend to not accept any
further amendments. That means that the minimum discussion period
will
On Sun, Nov 02, 2014 at 02:34:45PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
Ian Jackson writes (Amendment (Re: Re-Proposal - preserve freedom of choice
of init systems)):
For the avoidance of any doubt, I currently intend to not accept any
further amendments. That means that the minimum discussion period
Kurt Roeckx writes (Re: Calling for the vote (Re: Re-Proposal - preserve
freedom of choice of init systems)):
On Sun, Nov 02, 2014 at 02:34:45PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
That was at `Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 14:59:16 +0100'.
$ date -d 'Sun, 19 Oct 2014 14:59:16 +0100 +14 days'
Sun Nov
On Sun, Nov 02, 2014 at 10:59:24PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
Kurt Roeckx writes (Re: Calling for the vote (Re: Re-Proposal - preserve
freedom of choice of init systems)):
On Sun, Nov 02, 2014 at 02:34:45PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
That was at `Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 14:59:16 +0100'.
On Sun, Nov 02, 2014 at 10:59:24PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
Kurt Roeckx writes (Re: Calling for the vote (Re: Re-Proposal - preserve
freedom of choice of init systems)):
On Sun, Nov 02, 2014 at 02:34:45PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
That was at `Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 14:59:16 +0100'.
Kurt Roeckx writes (Re: Calling for the vote (Re: Re-Proposal - preserve
freedom of choice of init systems)):
On Sun, Nov 02, 2014 at 10:59:24PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
The last (and only) formal amendment I accepted was my own, on Sunday
the 19th.
It looks like you're right.
Great,
The Wanderer wande...@fastmail.fm writes:
Is it? I thought part of the problem is that there are packages whose
upstream supports (or at least enables) compiling with / without
integration to functionality provided by systemd, and which are provided
in Debian only as compiled with that
[I agree wholeheartedly with Russ's points regarding systemd and logind.
One tangential response to a different point:]
Russ Allbery wrote:
There are a ton, but because Debian architectures encode choice of kernel,
they're represented in the archive as packages that are not available for
(Responding quickly to only the part I think I can address well on short
notice, without needing to spend a long time thinking it over.)
On 11/02/2014 at 07:58 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
The Wanderer wande...@fastmail.fm writes:
systemd-shim 8.2 and 7.1 do not list a dependency on systemd, or
The Wanderer wande...@fastmail.fm writes:
On 11/02/2014 at 07:58 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
That's because the point of systemd-shim is to provide the services
that logind requires without running systemd as PID 1, so that packages
can then depend on logind without requiring systemd be PID 1.
Josh Triplett j...@joshtriplett.org writes:
Russ Allbery wrote:
There are a ton, but because Debian architectures encode choice of
kernel, they're represented in the archive as packages that are not
available for kFreeBSD or Hurd, or only available for kFreeBSD, or only
available for Hurd.
12 matches
Mail list logo
