Re: [DNG] Our friendly community

Rainer Weikusat writes: A somewhat loaded "executive summary" of [Russ Allbery's] statement > could be: > "Considering that systemd was forced into Debian, I really don't see why I would want to bother was all this boring tech stuff any longer". An improbable reading given that Russ voted

Re: [DNG] Our friendly community

On 18/12/15 15:54, Didier Kryn wrote: Le 18/12/2015 15:35, John Hughes a écrit : The list is, of course, spurious. $ cat /etc/debian_version 8.2 $ apt-cache rdepends libsystemd0 | wc -l 74 Sorry, my primary attitude is to believe what people write. So it's only 74. Does it include

Re: [DNG] Our friendly community

Didier Kryn writes: The list of 4583 packages now depending on libsysemd0 includes a lot of packages which definitely have nothing to do with it. The final lock will happen when the dependency will reach the shells and gcc. Given the fast contamination, we should expect this pretty soon.

Re: [DNG] Our friendly community

On 18/12/15 16:51, Mitt Green wrote: is nothing but "systemd support code added to some package". If it is so, why there is so much hype about it? Hype about what? libsystemd0? The only "hype" about libsystemd0 was from LKCL who came up with a strange plan to remove it by replacing

Re: [DNG] Our friendly community

On 18/12/15 16:25, Rainer Weikusat wrote: If you look at , | if (init_is_systemd) { |do some systemd stuff; | } | else { |carry on as before; | } ` you'll note that the if (init_is_systemd) { do some systemd stuff; } else { /* syslog(LOG_EMERG,

Re: [DNG] Our friendly community

On 18/12/15 17:18, Mitt Green wrote: No, the actual work on packages that remove libsystemd0 dependency. I've done quite of it for my machine. Notable examples include angband repositories apart from Devuan's own. Adam made a big base removing the dependency. But why? What badness does

Re: [DNG] Our friendly community

On 18/12/15 18:06, Hendrik Boom wrote: Indeed, both are true. Devuan is about choice. Since Debian is quite clearly providing the alternative of using systemd, And the alternative of *not* using systemd. the main effort here is to provide the alternative of not using systemd. The main part

Re: [DNG] Our friendly community

On 18/12/15 15:50, Mitt Green wrote: It's a library whose sole purpose is to make sure that packages *don't* depend on systemd. So, you are saying that libsystemd0 is harmless and it doesn't mean anything unless you install systemd, systemd-sysv and so on? Exactly. (aargh. resending 'cos got

Re: [DNG] Our friendly community

On 19/12/15 17:28, Adam Borowski wrote: Systemd-shim is a tool for running _systemd_ without it being pid 1. It's useless without systemd. Huh? systemd-shim is a tool for using libbpam-systemd (which Gnome depends on) without systemd being *installed* In fact it *breaks* systemd, you

Re: [DNG] Our friendly community

On 20/12/15 11:18, Adam Borowski wrote: On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 10:12:05AM +0100, John Hughes wrote: Huh? systemd-shim is a tool for using libbpam-systemd (which Gnome depends on) without systemd being *installed* In fact it *breaks* systemd, you can't have them both installed. Package

Re: [DNG] Our friendly community

On 20/12/15 13:20, Adam Borowski wrote: On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 12:21:11PM +0100, John Hughes wrote: On 20/12/15 11:18, Adam Borowski wrote: Package: libpam-systemd [...] Depends: libc6 (>= 2.17), libpam0g (>= 0.99.7.1), libselinux1 (>= 1.32), systemd (= 228-2), libpam-runtime (&

Re: [DNG] Devuan's goal: was Our friendly community

On 21/12/15 12:41, Rowland Penny wrote: On 21/12/15 11:06, John Hughes wrote: On 21/12/15 11:52, Rowland Penny wrote: On 21/12/15 10:03, John Hughes wrote: What I'm looking for is choice -- I want people who want systemd to be able to run it, and people who dont want it to be able to use

Re: [DNG] Devuan's goal: was Our friendly community

On 20/12/15 19:01, Rainer Weikusat wrote: John Hughes <j...@atlantech.com> writes: On 19/12/15 11:58, dev1fanboy wrote: Gnome If you need more: apt-cache rdepends libsystemd0 | wc -l We're going round in circles. *I* posted that command: https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/m

Re: [DNG] Devuan's goal: was Our friendly community

On 21/12/15 11:52, Rowland Penny wrote: On 21/12/15 10:03, John Hughes wrote: What I'm looking for is choice -- I want people who want systemd to be able to run it, and people who dont want it to be able to use sysvinit, openrc or upstart or whatever. At the moment things are all fucked

Re: [DNG] Devuan's goal: was Our friendly community

On 18/12/15 19:02, Steve Litt wrote: Yeah, in an ideal world, we'd like to remove every rotting vestige of systemd, but in a practical world, where if we don't timely produce something people can actually use, this has all been for naught, removal is a process, where on the first go-around we

Re: [DNG] Our friendly community

On 18/12/15 19:40, Steve Litt wrote: On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 17:39:26 +0100 John Hughes <j...@atlantech.com> wrote: On 18/12/15 17:18, Mitt Green wrote: No, the actual work on packages that remove libsystemd0 dependency. I've done quite of it for my machine. Notable examples include a

Re: [DNG] Our friendly community

On 18/12/15 15:50, Mitt Green wrote: It's a library whose sole purpose is to make sure that packages *don't* depend on systemd. So, you are saying that libsystemd0 is harmless and it doesn't mean anything unless you install systemd, systemd-sysv and so on? Exactly.

Re: [DNG] Devuan's goal: was Our friendly community

On 19/12/15 11:40, dev1fanboy wrote: You have to avoid many other packages to avoid systemd and in some cases you will end up with systemd support that you don't want anyway. For example? ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org

Re: [DNG] Our friendly community

On 19/12/15 11:28, Rowland Penny wrote: On 19/12/15 10:21, John Hughes wrote: On 18/12/15 19:40, Steve Litt wrote: most of [ JH's posts ] tended to say "libsystemd0 isn't that bad", I don't think it's that bad, and, despite my asking nobody can tell me why it is. I will give

Re: [DNG] Our friendly community

On 19/12/15 12:02, Rowland Penny wrote: Look, you troll, If you 'apt-get remove systemd' on debian, it will remove Gnome or Mate, I know I tried. Anything that does this, is *BAD* in my books. You're doing it wrong.

Re: [DNG] Our friendly community

On 19/12/15 12:54, Rowland Penny wrote: On 19/12/15 11:45, John Hughes wrote: On 19/12/15 12:02, Rowland Penny wrote: Look, you troll, If you 'apt-get remove systemd' on debian, it will remove Gnome or Mate, I know I tried. Anything that does this, is *BAD* in my books. You're doing

Re: [DNG] Our friendly community

On 19/12/15 12:47, KatolaZ wrote: On Sat, Dec 19, 2015 at 11:02:49AM +, Rowland Penny wrote: [cut] Look, you troll, If you 'apt-get remove systemd' on debian, it will remove Gnome or Mate, I know I tried. Anything that does this, is *BAD* in my books. It also removes cups and many other

Re: [DNG] Devuan's goal: was Our friendly community

On 19/12/15 11:58, dev1fanboy wrote: Gnome If you need more: apt-cache rdepends libsystemd0 | wc -l We're going round in circles. *I* posted that command: https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/message/20151218.143549.77d859b4.en.html But you still haven't said *why* you want to remove libsystemd0.

Re: [DNG] Our friendly community

On 19/12/15 14:34, Dragan FOSS wrote: On 12/19/2015 01:05 PM, John Hughes wrote: people who don't want to use systemd are forced into running broken systems, so I would like to see useful work towards making it possible to easily run alternatives to systemd. You're obviously ignorant

Re: [DNG] Debian testing drop redis non systemd

On 22/10/17 11:37, Jaromil wrote: Thanks everyone for adding details, On Fri, 20 Oct 2017, Patrick Meade wrote: https://github.com/lamby/pkg-redis/commit/6a9e4d0142b45195a0d55945bbc558df4c48707b#diff-9e388da7cd119765989cc22d2bc07e5c This diff clearly shows that redis-sentinel example scripts

Re: [DNG] Debian testing drop redis non systemd

On 21/10/17 01:53, Patrick Meade wrote: That text is not from the Debian changelog, but rather from debian/NEWS. Ah, didn't notice that.  Always trust the code before the doc. Still don't understand why it says "in favour of systemd's ... commands" when the patch does no such thing. The

Re: [DNG] rc.local removed from Debian 9, rly?

On 22/11/17 02:59, Arnt Karlsen wrote: On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 18:21:14 +0100, John wrote in message : (Damn but the systemd journal is great :-)) ..is there a way to decode and read those binary systemd journal logs on classic POSIX/Unix etc

Re: [DNG] rc.local removed from Debian 9, rly?

On 22/11/17 08:48, Didier Kryn wrote: Le 22/11/2017 à 07:19, John Hughes a écrit : Is there any way to read a file in format X without a program that reads format X?     The question is why use yet another "proprietary format"? Just to force people to be use systemd for every task

Re: [DNG] rc.local removed from Debian 9, rly?

On 21/11/17 19:46, Jaromil wrote: On Tue, 21 Nov 2017, John Hughes wrote: Come to think about it, if the problem was that their rc.local was failing somewhere then they should be able to see that in the output of systemctl or journalctl. Assuming they're using systemd

Re: [DNG] rc.local removed from Debian 9, rly?

On 22/11/17 11:42, Jaromil wrote: On Wed, 22 Nov 2017, John Hughes wrote: No way to do that?  Seriously?  No way at all? jeez, is John a troll? My little joke about the usefulness of the systemd journal in diagnosing the /etc/rc.local problem could conceivably be considered trolling

Re: [DNG] rc.local removed from Debian 9, rly?

On 22/11/17 12:32, KatolaZ wrote: On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 12:24:28PM +0100, John Hughes wrote: I was amazed that KatolaZ couldn't imagine any way of reading text from a file without a special application, doesn't he have strings(1) on his "forensic system"? As for journalctl,

Re: [DNG] ..forensics on systemd or journald logs

the publicly available documentation. ..the "strings" approach suggested by John Hughes requires an intimate knowledge of systemd and might be relevant if the investigations were on "systemd sabotaging Devuan playing _new_ zero-day dirty tricks." Intimate knowledge?  No, all

Re: [DNG] ..forensics on systemd or journald logs, was: rc.local removed from Debian 9, rly?

On 22/11/17 15:08, Aldemir Akpinar wrote: On 22 November 2017 at 17:03, John Hughes <j...@atlantech.com <mailto:j...@atlantech.com>> wrote: On 22/11/17 14:18, Aldemir Akpinar wrote: Could you elaborate why are you comparing a relational database system where it

Re: [DNG] ..forensics on systemd or journald logs, was: rc.local removed from Debian 9, rly?

On 22/11/17 14:18, Aldemir Akpinar wrote: That's routine. Few readers read everything that can be read. For example, look at postgres. Its binary file format reveals quite a bit more than you can get using psql, and by design: The writer and binary format are intended for

Re: [DNG] Please provide systemd-free libreswan package

On 17/11/17 16:14, Rowland Penny wrote: On Fri, 17 Nov 2017 15:54:39 +0100 John Hughes <j...@atlantech.com> wrote: systemd, like init(1), doesn't just run on boot -- it's running continuously. Excuse me apologist troll, but that is the whole point, it shouldn't have to. It doesn't

Re: [DNG] Please provide systemd-free libreswan package

On 17/11/17 16:38, Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote: Didier Kryn writes:     That's why a bunch of people have endeavoured replacing systemd-udev by mdev or mdevd, something much simpler to configure and not locked-in. The only issue now is that sysfs is unstable on purpose to force libudev on people

Re: [DNG] Please provide systemd-free libreswan package

On 17/11/17 17:04, John Hughes wrote: On 17/11/17 16:38, Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote: Didier Kryn writes:     That's why a bunch of people have endeavoured replacing systemd-udev by mdev or mdevd, something much simpler to configure and not locked-in. The only issue now is that sysfs is unstable

Re: [DNG] WARNING: lvm2 > 2.02.173-1 breaks some systems and make them unbootable

On 12/11/17 04:24, Joerg Reisenweber wrote: On Tue 07 November 2017 17:50:27 John Hughes wrote: The separation of / and /usr is a relic of really, really tiny disk sizes. Like, for example, ARMv7 systems with a 128MB NAND to boot from, keeping /usr on a separate storage like SSD? Doesn't sound

Re: [DNG] WARNING: lvm2 > 2.02.173-1 breaks some systems and make them unbootable

On 13/11/17 13:09, Joerg Reisenweber wrote: On Sun 12 November 2017 21:54:36 Steve Litt wrote: One more thing: What did people do before maybe 2010, when /sbin, /bin, /usr/sbin, and /user/bin were four separate directories? Was life that hard back then? Were develpers smarter? I'd bet all and

Re: [DNG] WARNING: lvm2 > 2.02.173-1 breaks some systems and make them unbootable

On 14/11/17 12:32, Joerg Reisenweber wrote: On Tue 14 November 2017 10:42:48 John Hughes wrote: Those who do not understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly funny you quote that in this particular context. Seems to me the whole mess introduced by systemd (incl the /usr/ disaster

Re: [DNG] WARNING: lvm2 > 2.02.173-1 breaks some systems and make them unbootable

On 14/11/17 08:30, Joerg Reisenweber wrote: On Mon 13 November 2017 15:46:30 John Hughes wrote: systemd didn't exist in 1991 when USL decided that for SVR4.2 /bin, /lib and /sbin should just be symlinks to /usr. And when did USL (whoever that is) USL = UNIX System Laboratories

Re: [DNG] WARNING: lvm2 > 2.02.173-1 breaks some systems and make them unbootable

On 14/11/17 12:53, Rowland Penny wrote: On Tue, 14 Nov 2017 12:40:02 +0100 John Hughes <j...@atlantech.com> wrote: On 14/11/17 12:32, Joerg Reisenweber wrote: On Tue 14 November 2017 10:42:48 John Hughes wrote: Those who do not understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly fun

Re: [DNG] rc.local removed from Debian 9, rly?

On 19/11/17 15:10, Jaromil wrote: Following up after the conversation on redis, when we had the elected Debian leader chiming in here to defend his position and keep deleting init.d scripts, I still believe this is again "even worst than I thought" and it is "vandalism". But Jaromil, as Chris

Re: [DNG] I found a new reason to dislike debian...

On 20/11/17 05:01, zap wrote: there are dongle usbs whose firmware has been made free software, and I cannot use this firmware from devuan, because some arrogant debian devs were too lazy to remove the non-free package and add the free package. so annoying. Firmware is required, which can be

Re: [DNG] I found a new reason to dislike debian...

On 21/11/17 00:09, zap wrote: it is "very strange" and also "really stupid" that they waited this long... People scratch the itches *they* have.  That's how free software works, and even now, they still don't have it included in stretch... its really infuriating... but yeah...

Re: [DNG] rc.local removed from Debian 9, rly?

On 20/11/17 11:30, Jaromil wrote: 1- it [ rc.local ] is not created by default It exists on my stretch systems.  As  Olaf Meeuwissen said it is created by initscripts.postinst: # # Create /etc/rc.local on first time install and when upgrading from # versions before "2.86.ds1-16"

Re: [DNG] I found a new reason to dislike debian...

On 20/11/17 14:08, zap wrote: On 11/20/2017 04:08 AM, John Hughes wrote: Firmware is required, which can be provided by installing the firmware-atheros <https://packages.debian.org/firmware-atheros> package. Open firmware <https://wiki.debian.org/ath9k_htc/open_firmware> for

Re: [DNG] rc.local removed from Debian 9, rly?

On 21/11/17 11:58, Olaf Meeuwissen wrote: A quick check of the packages that would pull [ initscripts ] in (as per massaged `apt-cache rdepends`) on Stretch gives: $ apt-cache rdepends initscripts | sed -n '/^ /p' | while read pkg; do \ echo $pkg ; apt-cache depends $pkg | grep

Re: [DNG] rc.local removed from Debian 9, rly?

site more than "important", it's a dependency for sysvinit-core. -- John Hughes, CalvaEDI S.A.S. -- An Esker Company <john.hug...@calva.com> +33 1 4313 3131 ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] rc.local removed from Debian 9, rly?

On 21/11/17 16:19, Jaromil wrote: On Tue, 21 Nov 2017, John Hughes wrote: Then I believe we also agree that rc.local is a serious regressions? What regression? the fact that besides creating it and making it executable, one must also activate the service unit. No, you don't.  systemd runs

Re: [DNG] rc.local removed from Debian 9, rly?

On 21/11/17 16:19, Jaromil wrote: no, the "rumors" I refer to are, as I said, coming from an upstream project whose CI has broken. You said: Here the rumors I've heard from bitcoin core development: a CI script was broken for three reasons, of which the mandatory activation of rc.local via

Re: [DNG] rc.local removed from Debian 9, rly?

On 21/11/17 17:53, Jaromil wrote: On Tue, 21 Nov 2017, John Hughes wrote: I followed your link to "gitian-building-setup-gitian-debian.md" Which says that you need to create the rc.local and reboot.  I see no mention of systemctl.  Am I looking in the wrong place?

Re: [DNG] rc.local removed from Debian 9, rly?

On 21/11/17 14:54, Rowland Penny wrote: On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 14:48:49 +0100 John Hughes <j...@atlantech.com> wrote: No, no systemctl commands are needed, systemd-rc-local-generator will enable rc-local.service if /etc/rc.local is executable, which it is by default on Debian Stretch (AKA

Re: [DNG] rc.local removed from Debian 9, rly?

On 21/11/17 14:21, Jaromil wrote: On Tue, 21 Nov 2017, John Hughes wrote: On 20/11/17 11:30, Jaromil wrote: 1- it [ rc.local ] is not created by default It exists on my stretch systems. I always and only mean Debian 9. So I will reformulate: 1- /etc/rc.local does not exist

Re: [DNG] rc.local removed from Debian 9, rly?

On 21/11/17 15:20, Jaromil wrote: dear John and Olaf, Thanks for proving me wrong, this is exactly what I hoped for. I'm not actually sure you've been "proved wrong" -- in the case of a Debian 9 system without the initscripts package installed (i.e. a fresh install with systemd as pid 1 for

Re: [DNG] Please provide systemd-free libreswan package

On 16/11/17 01:59, Steve Litt wrote: This situation is nothing unexpected. Many of us predicted in 2014 that Debian would continue throwing down all the anti-anti-systemd obstructionism they could muster. It would not be unreasonable to expect that the time will come where most Debian packages

Re: [DNG] Please provide systemd-free libreswan package

On 15/11/17 15:30, Sam Protsenko wrote: Recently "libreswan" package was added to Debian: [1]. But it only contains systemd init script and lacks sysvinit script. Corresponding bug was reported to Debian bug tracking system: [2]. But libreswan maintainer refuses to include sysvinit script to his

Re: [DNG] Please provide systemd-free libreswan package

On 17/11/17 15:48, Nelson H. F. Beebe wrote: Thus, systemd represents a code base of about 455,000 to 833,000 lines spread over 2201 files. The main problem that systemd tries to solve is correct ordering of startup script execution, a job that is done only at boot time. systemd, like

Re: [DNG] RMS: was Google abandons UEFI in Chromebooks

On 03/11/17 21:08, J. Fahrner wrote: Windows NT is based on DEC VMS, not a very modern OS ;-) I.E. more "modern" than Unix. Being "modern" is not always a good thing.  I'd have assumed that wasn't a controversial idea around here. ___ Dng

Re: [DNG] WARNING: lvm2 > 2.02.173-1 breaks some systems and make them unbootable

On 08/11/17 03:33, Steve Litt wrote: 1) If a tree falls in the woods but there's nobody to hear it, did it make a sound? Recommended reading for Steve Litt and others who use a kill-file (not that he'll see this): Wave Without a Shore by C.J. Cherryh

Re: [DNG] [SOLVED] Re: Our servers are unreachable (Current outage at OVH)

On 09/11/17 13:08, KatolaZ wrote: just to let you know that the outage at OVH has been resolved, and all our services are now back online. None of the machines was actually rebooted, so it seems it was just a network issue on the OVH site. Lucky you.  Mine is still in some kind of routing maze

Re: [DNG] RMS: was Google abandons UEFI in Chromebooks

On 03/11/17 20:58, Edward Bartolo wrote: I know little about this Hurd 'little' thing, but it gives me the shivers like systemd. Ah.  "I know little about it but I don't like it". Similar to the latter, there is a small core at the centre with all the other helper executables

Re: [DNG] WARNING: lvm2 > 2.02.173-1 breaks some systems and make them unbootable

On 07/11/17 16:50, Klaus Ethgen wrote: If you have an seperate /usr (what is not supported by the ignorance of systemd) and that /usr on lvm and a kernel with no initrd (what does not exist in the ignorance of systemd), then you are doomed and your system will not boot anymore. What does this

Re: [DNG] WARNING: lvm2 > 2.02.173-1 breaks some systems and make them unbootable

On 07/11/17 16:21, John Hughes wrote: On 07/11/17 15:29, Klaus Ethgen wrote: today I suffered by a heavy bug in lvm2. With version 2.02.175-1 it starts to depend on library in /usr. Which binary? What library in /usr? So, it seems some things depend on lz4.  But nothing mentions

Re: [DNG] WARNING: lvm2 > 2.02.173-1 breaks some systems and make them unbootable

On 07/11/17 15:29, Klaus Ethgen wrote: today I suffered by a heavy bug in lvm2. With version 2.02.175-1 it starts to depend on library in /usr. Which binary? What library in /usr? If you have an seperate /usr (what is not supported by the ignorance of systemd) and that /usr on lvm and a

Re: [DNG] WARNING: lvm2 > 2.02.173-1 breaks some systems and make them unbootable

On 07/11/17 17:50, John Hughes wrote: The separation of / and /usr is a relic of really, really tiny disk sizes. (The first machine I used had 8 megacharacter disks -- not megabyte, megacharacter.   Six bit characters.  Ok, it didn't run Unix

Re: [DNG] WARNING: lvm2 > 2.02.173-1 breaks some systems and make them unbootable

On 07/11/17 17:13, Klaus Ethgen wrote: [ separate / and /usr ] is the best way to keep your /usr flexible to further lvm grows for example. Personally I have a / on a lvm2 volume.  Works OK for me, I see no loss in flexibility. Like I say, SVR4.2 deprecated separate /usr in the 1990's.  I

Re: [DNG] WARNING: lvm2 > 2.02.173-1 breaks some systems and make them unbootable

On 07/11/17 17:41, dev wrote: On 11/07/2017 10:29 AM, John Hughes wrote: On 07/11/17 17:13, Klaus Ethgen wrote: [ separate / and /usr ] is the best way to keep your /usr flexible to further lvm grows for example. Personally I have a / on a lvm2 volume.  Works OK for me, I see no loss

Re: [DNG] Clear communication (Was: Debian testing drop redis)

On 29/10/17 00:41, Patrick Meade wrote: On 10/28/2017 02:06 AM, John Hughes wrote: While keeping your eyes peeled is obviously a good thing please remember the downsides of crying wolf when the wolf isn't there. Clear communication is also a good thing. Perhaps the words "[D]rops the D

Re: [DNG] Google abandons UEFI in Chromebooks

On 30/10/17 08:44, Dr. Nikolaus Klepp wrote: Am Montag, 30. Oktober 2017 schrieb J. Fahrner: https://osseu17.sched.com/event/ByYt/replace-your-exploit-ridden-firmware-with-linux-ronald-minnich-google Nice. But it they suffer from the "not invented here"-syndrome: instead of using prooven good

Re: [DNG] Debian testing drop redis non systemd

On 24/10/17 14:44, Patrick Meade wrote: Only the first option is acceptable to me, so what needs to be done is also clear to me. I'm hoping that the Debian maintainer will be willing to revert this change, as that would be the easiest way for everybody to win. If not, well... there is some

Re: [DNG] Redhat CEO answers questions

On 31/10/17 14:23, Aldemir Akpinar wrote: In case you guys have missed, Jim Whitehurst, redhat ceo, answered some questions on slashdot, and of course many people asked about systemd. You can find the question and his answer here:

Re: [DNG] Debian testing drop redis non systemd

On 26/10/17 15:55, John Hughes wrote: They are around 89 lines long.  Hardly broken compared to most init scripts, check out /etc/init.d/sendmail -- a 1321 line monster in some versions. Duh, hardly "bloated" I meant to say. ___ D

Re: [DNG] Runit for Devuan: was Debian testing drop redis

On 27/10/17 07:29, Steve Litt wrote: U mean runit's author/upstream maintainer, or do you mean Debian's maintainer for runit? Where does this information come from? Debian's runit maintainer, Dmitry Bogatov, was arrested, accused of "preparing to organize mass disorder" and making "public

Re: [DNG] Debian testing drop redis

On 27/10/17 07:21, Steve Litt wrote: No Debian fan, Chris Lamb or otherwise, Debian fan? He's one of the people who build the distribution Devuan is  based on.  He's not a "fan". They're not stupid: They know how much they hurt Linux interchangeable parts with their rush to judgment on

Re: [DNG] Runit for Devuan: was Debian testing drop redis

Oh, yes, the last thing in the runit changelog is: runit (2.1.2-9.2) unstable; urgency=medium * non-maintainer upload * re-add /sbin/runit{,-init} to runit package so it remains possible to use runit as PID 1 -- Daniel Kahn Gillmor Wed, 31 May 2017 12:44:38

[DNG] Debian testing drop redis non systemd

Jaromil wrote: I would like to know here if anyone knows in detail the "reasons" Debian is removing the support for sysvinit scripts in the redis package. Wouldn't it be more to the point to find out *if* Debian is removing the support for sysvinit scripts in the redis package before trying

Re: [DNG] Debian testing drop redis non systemd

On 20/10/17 16:37, Antony Stone wrote: However, Bardot Jérôme's original posting in this thread, quoting Chris Lamb Wed, 11 Oct 2017 22:55:00 -0400 said: "This version drops the Debian-specific support for the /etc/redis/redis-{server}.sentinel.{pre,post}-{up,down}.d

Re: [DNG] Debian testing drop redis non systemd

On 20/10/17 16:48, goli...@dyne.org wrote: On 2017-10-20 09:27, John Hughes wrote: My appologies for posting to a list from which I have been banned . . . If you were 'banned' you would would not have been able to post. I just checked and your account has no restrictions on it. Yup, I

Re: [DNG] Debian testing drop redis non systemd

On 25/10/17 19:51, Steve Litt wrote: How bout this: Have a "runit-supervisor-only" pacakge that installs runit but doesn't make it PID1. Have sysvinit run runit, and have runit run redis, with all the correct config. The runit run script is probably 1/10 the size of its bloatacious and

Re: [DNG] Debian testing drop redis

On 26/10/17 17:05, KatolaZ wrote: John, I was among those who tried to calm the storm down. As I noted.  It didn't seem to have much effect though. We should all try to be a bit more careful before coming to conclusions. I agree. Unfortunately, we have seen already silly things coming from

Re: [DNG] Debian testing drop redis

On 26/10/17 16:06, KatolaZ wrote: please discard the angry comments. Evidently not everybody had a full understanding of what was going on, before posting them. We repeatedly said that there was no reason to freak out, and that the situation was under control. Thanks for confirming it yourself

Re: [DNG] Debian testing drop redis non systemd

On 23/10/17 15:59, Patrick Meade wrote: As John Hughes said, this isn't quite as bad as we originally thought. We can still run redis-server with the Debian provided sysvinit script, and Debian isn't throwing away upstream files for no reason. Also note that the upstream init script

Re: [DNG] Chris Lamb = Good Maintainer (Was: Debian testing drop redis)

On 27/10/17 21:56, Jaromil wrote: my training in hermeneutics and epistemology rings a bell about this being the wrong general attitude about changes and regressions, but for now I just rest on the fact redis "just works" in Devuan ASCII (using sysvinit) and that, as I stated at the

Re: [DNG] Runit for Devuan: was Debian testing drop redis

On 28/10/17 03:45, Steve Litt wrote: I'm the original poster of the thread renamed "Runit for Devuan", and I don't understand this email at all. What does a debian bug about s6 have to do with my offer to be one of a two person team to bring a runit package to Devuan? You said > s6's

Re: [DNG] Debian testing drop redis

On 28/10/17 01:39, zap wrote: On 10/27/2017 04:51 AM, John Hughes wrote: On 27/10/17 07:21, Steve Litt wrote: No Debian fan, Chris Lamb or otherwise, Debian fan? He's one of the people who build the distribution Devuan is  based on.  He's not a "fan". That is very impressive