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

Hi Jaromil, list, Jaromil writes: > dear John and Olaf, > > Thanks for proving me wrong, this is exactly what I hoped for. > > In fact my mail was perhaps badly worded and contained already a rant, > but was really about asking this list for a critical analysis. For 2 > main reasons: 1) there

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

On Wed, 22 Nov 2017, John Hughes wrote: > 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 >

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

November 22, 2017 11:21 AM, "John Hughes" wrote: > 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

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

Quoting Steve Litt (sl...@troubleshooters.com): > Acronym for Apologist Troll. HANDY! (Acronym for 'Have A Nice Day, Y'all.') ___ 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 Wed, 22 Nov 2017 14:44:57 -0500, Steve wrote in message <20171122144457.02549...@mydesk.domain.cxm>: > On Wed, 22 Nov 2017 13:03:45 +0100 > Arnt Karlsen wrote: > > > On Wed, 22 Nov 2017 02:28:45 -0500, Steve wrote in message > > <20171122022845.1327c...@mydesk.domain.cxm>:

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

On Wed, 22 Nov 2017 13:02:37 +0100, John wrote in message <0788acc2-15f4-491f-61bf-d28664664...@atlantech.com>: > 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 > >>

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

On Wed, 22 Nov 2017 13:03:45 +0100 Arnt Karlsen wrote: > On Wed, 22 Nov 2017 02:28:45 -0500, Steve wrote in message > <20171122022845.1327c...@mydesk.domain.cxm>: > > > On Wed, 22 Nov 2017 02:59:11 +0100 > > Arnt Karlsen wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 21 Nov

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

Quoting Arnt Karlsen (a...@iaksess.no): > On Wed, 22 Nov 2017 02:28:45 -0500, Steve wrote in message > <20171122022845.1327c...@mydesk.domain.cxm>: > > A T > > ..er, I _totally_ lost you here. A vådeskudd? ("An > unintended discharge?", may happen if the wrong xterm > has keyboard focus

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

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 07:50:44PM +0900, Olaf Meeuwissen wrote: > > Whether /etc/rc.local will be run (and on what run levels) is, IMHO, a > matter for *your* init system to decide. If your init system wants to > cater to a decades long tradition of running /etc/rc.local at system > startup, it

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

On Wed, 22 Nov 2017 02:28:45 -0500, Steve wrote in message <20171122022845.1327c...@mydesk.domain.cxm>: > On Wed, 22 Nov 2017 02:59:11 +0100 > Arnt Karlsen wrote: > > > On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 18:21:14 +0100, John wrote in message > >

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, you forget to

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

Hi all, I've read all the followup until 2017-11-22T10:21Z. I may follow up on selected posts, but I wanted to tackle this first. KatolaZ writes: > On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 04:05:47PM +0100, John Hughes wrote: >> On 21/11/17 15:53, KatolaZ wrote: >> >> >What matters is that we need to retain

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

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 12:24:28PM +0100, John Hughes wrote: > 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

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.  The

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

On Wed, 22 Nov 2017, John Hughes wrote: > > On 22/11/17 06:50, KatolaZ wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 02:59:11AM +0100, Arnt Karlsen wrote: > > > > > ..is there a way to decode and read those binary systemd journal logs > > > on classic POSIX/Unix etc forensic systems _not_ running systemd?

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 they need

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

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 they need to do with their computer.     The

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

On Wed, 22 Nov 2017 02:59:11 +0100 Arnt Karlsen wrote: > On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 18:21:14 +0100, John wrote in message > : > > > (Damn but the systemd journal is great :-)) A T SteveT Steve Litt November 2017 featured

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, of

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 Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 02:59:11AM +0100, 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

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

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 forensic systems _not_ running systemd?

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

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 03:47:26PM -0500, Steve Litt wrote: > On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 14:53:28 + > KatolaZ wrote: > > > As Olaf explained, the problem seems to originate in the fact that the > > initscripts package is not any more marked as important. Hence, if you > >

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

On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 14:53:28 + KatolaZ wrote: > As Olaf explained, the problem seems to originate in the fact that the > initscripts package is not any more marked as important. Hence, if you > don't have it, you won't get it by default. I personally agree on the > fact

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

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, of course.  :-) Not really. Its not

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? nono, as I

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

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? nono, as I wrote: that script doesn't works

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 Tue, 21 Nov 2017, John Hughes wrote: > 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

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 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. > > In Debian right now I don't even see a debate, > > A

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

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 04:05:47PM +0100, John Hughes wrote: > On 21/11/17 15:53, KatolaZ wrote: > > > >Also, it is not clear to me *when* the automagic systemd tool that > >should create the systemd service (if rc.local is executable) is > >run. > > man systemd.generator > ... >   

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

On 21/11/17 15:53, KatolaZ wrote: Also, it is not clear to me *when* the automagic systemd tool that should create the systemd service (if rc.local is executable) is run. man systemd.generator ...    Generators are small binaries that live in    /usr/lib/systemd/user-generators/ and

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] rc.local removed from Debian 9, rly?

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 03:07:07PM +0100, John Hughes wrote: [cut] > > If you have the initscripts package installed then /etc/rc.local will be > created for you (if it doesn't exist) and it will be run (if you are using > sysvinit or systemd at least). > > If you don't install initscripts

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

dear John and Olaf, Thanks for proving me wrong, this is exactly what I hoped for. In fact my mail was perhaps badly worded and contained already a rant, but was really about asking this list for a critical analysis. For 2 main reasons: 1) there are very knowledgeable people (like you both)

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 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 Debian

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?

On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 14:48:49 +0100 John Hughes 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 Debian 9). > Yes, but will

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 by

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

Hi Jaromil, list, Jaromil writes: > dear Olaf, > > On Mon, 20 Nov 2017, Olaf Meeuwissen wrote: > >> Crying wolf like this time and again is not doing Devuan any good. > > No, I am the wolf. I do not mean this personally. I just recalled the mail that set off the redis discussion and this one

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

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 by default on Debian 9. this is not

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] rc.local removed from Debian 9, rly?

Am Montag 20 November 2017 schrieb Hendrik Boom: > On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 08:32:07PM +0100, Arnt Karlsen wrote: > > On Sun, 19 Nov 2017 18:52:13 +0100, Didier wrote in message > > > > : > > > Le 19/11/2017 à 15:10, Jaromil a écrit : > > > > hi all >

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

dear Olaf, On Mon, 20 Nov 2017, Olaf Meeuwissen wrote: > Crying wolf like this time and again is not doing Devuan any good. No, I am the wolf. > FWIW, I just modified the /etc/rc.local on two of my Devuan ASCII > machines to fix up ownership on an ext4 mount and that worked just > fine. But

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

Olaf Meeuwissen writes: Crying wolf like this time and again is not doing Devuan any good. Amen. ___ 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?

Hi, Jaromil writes: > On 19 November 2017 21:14:26 CET, Didier Kryn wrote: > >>Conclusion: initscripts profides the infrastructure to invoke >>/etc/rc.local if it exists, but it doesn't provide an empty >>/etc/rc.local. > > Ok, this is what I hoped and it still makes sense. > >

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

On Mon, 20 Nov 2017 10:01:17 +0100 John Hughes wrote: > 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

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] rc.local removed from Debian 9, rly?

On 19 November 2017 21:14:26 CET, Didier Kryn wrote: >Conclusion: initscripts profides the infrastructure to invoke >/etc/rc.local if it exists, but it doesn't provide an empty >/etc/rc.local. Ok, this is what I hoped and it still makes sense. IMHO deprecation means vandalism

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

On Sun, 19 Nov 2017 23:30:36 +, Dave wrote in message <352aa878-82d2-bfbc-28be-e28f8d97f...@barradas.free-online.co.uk>: > On 19/11/17 20:40, Arnt Karlsen wrote: > > On Sun, 19 Nov 2017 19:32:48 +, Dave wrote in message > >

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

On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 08:32:07PM +0100, Arnt Karlsen wrote: > On Sun, 19 Nov 2017 18:52:13 +0100, Didier wrote in message > : > > > Le 19/11/2017 à 15:10, Jaromil a écrit : > > > hi all > > > > > > Can anyone clarify how /etc/rc.local is being

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

On 19/11/17 20:40, Arnt Karlsen wrote: On Sun, 19 Nov 2017 19:32:48 +, Dave wrote in message <755e8783-b399-2941-0d2d-40aac6629...@barradas.free-online.co.uk>: On 19/11/17 14:10, Jaromil wrote: hi all Can anyone clarify how /etc/rc.local is being removed in Debian 9? I got this from

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

On Sun, 19 Nov 2017 20:32:07 +0100, Arnt wrote in message <20171119203207.183fc35c@d44>: > On Sun, 19 Nov 2017 18:52:13 +0100, Didier wrote in message > : > > > Le 19/11/2017 à 15:10, Jaromil a écrit : > > > hi all > > > > > > Can anyone clarify

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

Le 19/11/2017 à 20:32, Arnt Karlsen a écrit : On Sun, 19 Nov 2017 18:52:13 +0100, Didier wrote in message : Le 19/11/2017 à 15:10, Jaromil a écrit : hi all Can anyone clarify how /etc/rc.local is being removed in Debian 9?     Dunno how

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

On 19/11/17 14:10, Jaromil wrote: hi all Can anyone clarify how /etc/rc.local is being removed in Debian 9? I got this from rumors in bitcoin's core development, since I'm not subscribed to Debian lists. The rumor is confirmed by some online debates on gitlab and stack overflow. Can someone

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

On Sun, 19 Nov 2017 18:52:13 +0100, Didier wrote in message : > Le 19/11/2017 à 15:10, Jaromil a écrit : > > hi all > > > > Can anyone clarify how /etc/rc.local is being removed in Debian 9? > > > >     Dunno how difficult it is to re-create

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

Le 19/11/2017 à 18:52, Didier Kryn a écrit : Le 19/11/2017 à 15:10, Jaromil a écrit : hi all Can anyone clarify how /etc/rc.local is being removed in Debian 9? I got this from rumors in bitcoin's core development, since I'm not subscribed to Debian lists. The rumor is confirmed by some online

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

Le 19/11/2017 à 15:10, Jaromil a écrit : hi all Can anyone clarify how /etc/rc.local is being removed in Debian 9? I got this from rumors in bitcoin's core development, since I'm not subscribed to Debian lists. The rumor is confirmed by some online debates on gitlab and stack overflow. Can

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

On Sun, 19 Nov 2017 17:43:04 +0100 Jaromil wrote: > IMHO thinking conspiracy is self defeating, And yet there ARE conspiracies. Most US antitrust laws are a reaction to price-fixing conspiracies of the late 1800's and early 1900's. I don't understand why a conspiracy theory

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

hi Taiidan On 19 November 2017 17:11:27 CET, "taii...@gmx.com" wrote: >On 11/19/2017 09:10 AM, Jaromil wrote: >> is there any internal discussion about such governance issues in >> Debian? is there any hope the current leadership will change and >> perhaps repair what this

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

On 11/19/2017 09:10 AM, Jaromil wrote: is there any internal discussion about such governance issues in Debian? is there any hope the current leadership will change and perhaps repair what this vandalism is breaking? Am I the only one who thinks there is some kind of conspiracy here? I mean why

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

hi all Can anyone clarify how /etc/rc.local is being removed in Debian 9? I got this from rumors in bitcoin's core development, since I'm not subscribed to Debian lists. The rumor is confirmed by some online debates on gitlab and stack overflow. Can someone point out to the decision process