Le 23/03/2015 20:10, Nuno Magalhães a écrit :
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 6:59 PM, Mark R. Whitewhit...@gmail.com wrote:
Just to be clear: I've seen a lot of cross talk about the possibility of
systemd being put into Devuan via a sandbox or even having the systemd API
written in. Is it safe to
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 04:47:32PM -0700, Go Linux wrote:
A link to Revolution OS was recently posted on irc. I had never
seen it before. It seems that the cycle has come full circle and now
Devuan is going back to the future and reinventing the wheel all over
again. Only this time the
On Tue, 24 Mar 2015, Hendrik Boom wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 04:47:32PM -0700, Go Linux wrote:
A link to Revolution OS was recently posted on irc. I had never
seen it before. It seems that the cycle has come full circle and now
Devuan is going back to the future and reinventing the
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015, devuan...@spamgourmet.net wrote:
I did argue for some of things I think are sensible, just like
everybody else here. All of them can be implemented _without_ systemd
(and I have or had them running that way). Yes, one of the ideas I
like was first proposed by Lennart, but
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Jaromil - jaro...@dyne.org
devuan.kn.0edf9dfcba.jaromil#dyne@ob.0sg.net wrote:
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015, KatolaZ wrote:
This sounds strange and new at the same time, since GCC was indeed
designed to be portable and ported to several architectures since from
the
On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 5:48 AM, devuan...@spamgourmet.net wrote:
On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 2:40 AM, Jude Nelson - jud...@gmail.com
devuan.kn.ae5676beef.judecn#gmail@ob.0sg.net wrote:
The only way not to be forcing anybody is to stick with the least
common denominator for everything. That
GCC was deliberately making things interdepend on each other, even
without technical reasons, simply to prevent commercial entities to
replace the e.g. front-end of the compiler with some proprietary code
and then have that use the GPL backend. This would enable a new,
proprietary language to
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 6:59 PM, Mark R. White whit...@gmail.com wrote:
Just to be clear: I've seen a lot of cross talk about the possibility of
systemd being put into Devuan via a sandbox or even having the systemd API
written in. Is it safe to assume that going forward that there will be no
On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 10:39:11PM +0100, devuan...@spamgourmet.net wrote:
I think everyone is in agreement that they fulfill the letter of the
license. The spirit may be lacking especially in regards to access.
Being an enormous, interdependent hairball simply puts the code out of
reach
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015, Nate Bargmann wrote:
* On 2015 22 Mar 22:09 -0500, Peter Olson wrote:
On March 22, 2015 at 6:29 AM Jaromil jaro...@dyne.org wrote:
On Sat, 21 Mar 2015, Peter Olson wrote:
RMS didn't call me a troll, he answered the question. Somebody else
took it upon
On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 2:40 AM, Jude Nelson - jud...@gmail.com
devuan.kn.ae5676beef.judecn#gmail@ob.0sg.net wrote:
The only way not to be forcing anybody is to stick with the least
common denominator for everything. That flat out stops progress.
This is simply not true. A key hallmark of
On Sat, 21 Mar 2015, Peter Olson wrote:
On March 21, 2015 at 6:36 PM Robert Storey robert.sto...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hopefully, it's just a rumor, though it sounds real.
Indeed, I've been wondering why RMS hasn't commented on systemd long
ago when it became obvious that it would
On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 2:34 AM, Joerg Reisenweber -
reisenwe...@web.de
devuan.kn.d76efe93d7.reisenweber#web...@ob.0sg.net wrote:
From
*root fs: any you like, even MSDOS (with some limitations) *
to an undiscussed unsolicited
*root fs: btrfs mandatory*
is *not* the kind of progress I want to
On Sun 22 March 2015 11:29:54 devuan...@spamgourmet.net wrote:
Considering that the blog post is all about putting an idea up for
discussion I really do not see how that can be undiscussed and
unsolicited. How should you get a discussion started on the internet?
Considering how I clearly
I think everyone is in agreement that they fulfill the letter of the
license. The spirit may be lacking especially in regards to access.
Being an enormous, interdependent hairball simply puts the code out of
reach for all practical purposes as well as restricting use. Again,
that's spirit
Would it be possible to avoid offensive characterization of people who
do not think along the same lines?
Would it be possible to avoid gender-biased characterization of people
who are participating in this list?
Thank you
==
hk
___
Dng mailing list
On March 22, 2015 at 6:29 AM Jaromil jaro...@dyne.org wrote:
On Sat, 21 Mar 2015, Peter Olson wrote:
RMS didn't call me a troll, he answered the question. Somebody else
took it upon himself to refer to the question as trolling. I haven't
decided yet whether to speak to that person
Great reading. I knew RMS would answer something like that to that
question, if it's licensed under GPL, it's free software, period.
On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 12:41 PM, Nextime next...@nexlab.it wrote:
On March 21, 2015 3:34:28 PM WET, Jaromil jaro...@dyne.org wrote:
re all,
perhaps
On 21.03.2015 18:51, Linuxito wrote:
Great reading. I knew RMS would answer something like that to that
question, if it's licensed under GPL, it's free software, period.
( Actually it's LGPL [1] but ... )
I expect that he is thinking about it and will be thinking about it a
while longer before
re all,
perhaps interesting to perceive the atmosphere, no trolling intended and please
consider we shall not fight, rather seek undersanding and claim respect and the
right to have different opinions than the majority.
At Libreplanet (the GNU/FSF conference) today someone (who?? thanks for
RMS stance is understandable, because he is also responsible for the
current situation. He failed to predict it, and his dream is now
turning into another Animal Farm, where some developers are becoming
more equal than others (it's an open question if there was a better
strategy possible when GPL
[...all...] Sounds familiar? It's because developing and earning money
on support only will always lead to such pathologies. [...]
Full ACK
Internet and downloading complete distros (for free) kills the Linux FOSS
ecosystem now, like downloading mp3 music did kill the music ecosystem.
Suse
On Sun 22 March 2015 00:40:45 Joerg Reisenweber wrote:
kills the Linux FOSS ecosystem now,
This time read ecosystem as economic system. The ecologic system aka
community is probably still fine.
RH just establishes the new better economic system:
Hi Jörg,
I am going to get beaten for this, but that proposal is actually
brilliant! Well, brilliant if you are not bothered by btrfs that is:-)
But that is what I got backups for.
While I do not care about all the sandboxing that got mixed into this,
the rest got me really thinking about my
Hopefully, it's just a rumor, though it sounds real.
Indeed, I've been wondering why RMS hasn't commented on systemd long ago
when it became obvious that it would effectively dump his beloved Hurd
project into the trash can. If he really called someone a troll for
asking his opinion of systemd,
On Sun 22 March 2015 01:15:18 devuan...@spamgourmet.net wrote:
Hi Jörg,
I am going to get beaten for this, but that proposal is actually
brilliant! Well, brilliant if you are not bothered by btrfs that is:-)
But that is what I got backups for.
Besides me for one not liking the idea to *get*
On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 1:23 AM, Joerg Reisenweber -
reisenwe...@web.de
devuan.kn.d76efe93d7.reisenweber#web...@ob.0sg.net wrote:
Besides me for one not liking the idea to *get* *forced* to use btrfs for /,
The only way not to be forcing anybody is to stick with the least
common denominator for
On Sun 22 March 2015 01:42:33 devuan...@spamgourmet.net wrote:
On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 1:23 AM, Joerg Reisenweber -
reisenwe...@web.de
devuan.kn.d76efe93d7.reisenweber#web...@ob.0sg.net wrote:
Besides me for one not liking the idea to *get* *forced* to use btrfs for
/,
The only way not
On March 21, 2015 at 11:34 AM Jaromil jaro...@dyne.org wrote:
re all,
perhaps interesting to perceive the atmosphere, no trolling intended and
please
consider we shall not fight, rather seek undersanding and claim respect and
the
right to have different opinions than the majority.
At
On March 21, 2015 at 6:36 PM Robert Storey robert.sto...@gmail.com wrote:
Hopefully, it's just a rumor, though it sounds real.
Indeed, I've been wondering why RMS hasn't commented on systemd long ago
when it became obvious that it would effectively dump his beloved Hurd
project into the
30 matches
Mail list logo
