On Sat, 13 Oct 2018 10:31:33 -0400
Hendrik Boom wrote:
> It would be pleasant to quiet those who chant "Nyaa Nyaa Devuan isn't
> really about choice", but it's not worth the price we'd have to pay.
Most anti-Devuan people are brainless, so if we were to (crazily)
incorporate some systemd in
On 13/10/18 at 16:31, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 13, 2018 at 09:55:46AM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
>> On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 09:44:14 -0400
>> Hendrik Boom wrote:
>>
>>
>>> And while we're at it, we want not to support systemd.
>>> But living with inert systemd scripts is at least tolerable.
>>
On 10/12/2018 01:56 AM, KatolaZ wrote:
On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 11:55:29PM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 03:24:44 +
alecfeld...@disroot.org wrote:
1. Split the runit package into separate packages with alternate
stage files.
2. Provide a configuration file for how runit
On Sat, Oct 13, 2018 at 09:55:46AM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 09:44:14 -0400
> Hendrik Boom wrote:
>
>
> > And while we're at it, we want not to support systemd.
> > But living with inert systemd scripts is at least tolerable.
>
> Huh? U mean systemd unit files?
yes.
>
>
On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 09:44:14 -0400
Hendrik Boom wrote:
> And while we're at it, we want not to support systemd.
> But living with inert systemd scripts is at least tolerable.
Huh? U mean systemd unit files?
> Ideally there should be some systematic solution for all of this,
> leaving the
On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 10:56:26 +0200
KatolaZ wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 11:55:29PM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
> > On a related note, I think the best way of acquiring runit run
> > files is to install Void Linux on a VM, install all the various
> > daemons, and then view the run files in
On Thu, 11 Oct 2018 23:23:38 -0700
Rick Moen wrote:
> Part
> of the point I wanted to make, here (bearing in mind that I'm
> speaking only my own view), is that Devuan needs to be mindful of
> priorities and has necessarily limited volunteer effort. For better
> or worse, _if_ I understand
On 12/10/18 at 15:44, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> living with inert systemd scripts
Uh? What scripts? What systemd scripts (i.e. executable, interpreted
text files) do Devuan packages install?
Alessandro
--
Alessandro Selli
VOIP SIP: dhatarat...@ekiga.net
Chiave firma e cifratura PGP/GPG
On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 10:56:26AM +0200, KatolaZ wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 11:55:29PM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
> > On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 03:24:44 +
> > alecfeld...@disroot.org wrote:
> >
> >
> > > 1. Split the runit package into separate packages with alternate
> > > stage files.
> > >
On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 11:55:29PM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 03:24:44 +
> alecfeld...@disroot.org wrote:
>
>
> > 1. Split the runit package into separate packages with alternate
> > stage files.
> >
> > 2. Provide a configuration file for how runit should act. For
> >
Quoting alecfeld...@disroot.org (alecfeld...@disroot.org):
> First of all, I want to thank the developers for the efforts to
> continue debian without "systemd creep". I've experimented with the
> distribution on and off, but there's one big turnoff for me currently
> that I don't think would
On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 03:24:44 +
alecfeld...@disroot.org wrote:
> 1. Split the runit package into separate packages with alternate
> stage files.
>
> 2. Provide a configuration file for how runit should act. For
> instance, if openrc or sysvinit is installed, runit can depend
> on /etc/init.d
This is a "remail" of what I sent Daniel about a month ago for others on the
mailing list to see with a few changes and added details.
First of all, I want to thank the developers for the efforts to continue debian
without "systemd creep". I've experimented with the distribution on and off,
This is a "remail" of what I sent Daniel about a month ago for others on the
mailing list to see with a few changes and added details.
First of all, I want to thank the developers for the efforts to continue debian
without "systemd creep". I've experimented with the distribution on and off,
Hi all,
Acknowledged!
Could you elaborate the main feature of openrc-init that sysvinit does
not have?
Yours,
Benda
Svante Signell writes:
> On Fri, 2017-11-17 at 08:42 -0500, Ismael L. Donis Garcia wrote:
>
>> But I understand that the new versions of openrc
On Sat, 2017-11-18 at 01:51 -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Nov 2017 08:42:51 -0500
> "Ismael L. Donis Garcia" wrote:
>
> > But I understand that the new versions of openrc already bring the
> > possibility of functioning as an init system independently.
> >
> > In
On Fri, 2017-11-17 at 08:42 -0500, Ismael L. Donis Garcia wrote:
> But I understand that the new versions of openrc already bring the
> possibility of functioning as an init system independently.
>
> In that case, openrc could not be used as an alternative init?
Yes, openrc is now able to be
On 08/16/2017 07:06 AM, fsmithred wrote:
>
> It is installable with refractainstaller, but it has grub-efi installed.
> If you're on a legacy bios system, install the grub-pc debs before you run
> the installer, and don't select a place for the bootloader if it asks. Let
> the installer do that
On 08/16/2017 07:06 AM, fsmithred wrote:
> I made a live-iso with ascii, openrc and eudev for testing purposes.
> http://distro.ibiblio.org/refracta/files/experimental/ascii_oblx_eudv_oprc-20170813_.iso
>
> This started as a no-X Refracta-ascii amd64 live iso (standard system plus
> extra
I made a live-iso with ascii, openrc and eudev for testing purposes.
http://distro.ibiblio.org/refracta/files/experimental/ascii_oblx_eudv_oprc-20170813_.iso
This started as a no-X Refracta-ascii amd64 live iso (standard system plus
extra system utilities). Added openbox, lxpanel, lxterminal,
Just to make it clear, I have replied once more with the title changed...
I have donated 10$ to devuan as a thanks. I am not super rich, but I
have done what I can. so thank you.
On 07/02/2017 04:34 PM, zap wrote:
>
> On 07/02/2017 04:25 PM, Svante Signell wrote:
>> On Sun, 2017-07-02 at 14:51
On Sun, 2016-09-11 at 23:59 +0200, emnin...@riseup.net wrote:
> Am Sun, 11 Sep 2016 18:09:56 +0200
> schrieb Svante Signell :
>
> >
> > Maybe you have to install sys-rc before installing openrc?
>
> I looked and i have already installed sysv-rc. In any case, i did a
>
On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 10:32:52AM +0200, Jaromil wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Sep 2016, emnin...@riseup.net wrote:
> > Does that mean openrc as an option for devuan is gone?
>
> not at all. We even plan to roll out our own openrc package, ditching
> the one from Debian which has many problems. Perhaps
Le 16/09/2016 18:32, Steve Litt a écrit :
On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 12:24:45 +0200
Didier Kryn wrote:
Steve,
I like more and more this idea of separating the tasks:
- pid1 (sysvinit or whatever) performs one-shot startups and
basic supervision (like for getty),
On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 19:16:01 +0200
poitr pogo wrote:
> I agree.
> In perfect world of knowlegable programmers writing software that
> works there is no need for supervisors.
>
> One can handle errors or leave this for supervisor.
>
> For me supervisor will always be a tool
On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 13:17:52 -0400
Rob Owens wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 12:32 PM, Steve Litt
> wrote:
>
> >
> > Does OpenRC do the conditional starts?
>
>
> Yes, it does. See "The depend function" here:
>
On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 12:32 PM, Steve Litt
wrote:
>
> Does OpenRC do the conditional starts?
Yes, it does. See "The depend function" here:
http://www.funtoo.org/Package:OpenRC
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
I agree.
In perfect world of knowlegable programmers writing software that works
there is no need for supervisors.
One can handle errors or leave this for supervisor.
For me supervisor will always be a tool of a helpless admin.
Regards
piotr
___
Dng
On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 12:52:45PM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
[cut]
> >
> > But I am sure that 99.% of the users do not need supervisors in
> > 99.% of the cases...
>
> I wouldn't say 99.%. I think everyone running wpa_supplicant can
> benefit from having it respawnable, because it
On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 15:22:25 +0100
KatolaZ wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 03:51:43PM +0200, Didier Kryn wrote:
>
> [cut]
>
> > Nobody supervises pid1, OK? So why would the supervisor need to
> > be supervised? It is supposed to be rock solid. Note that it can be
> >
On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 15:51:43 +0200
Didier Kryn wrote:
> Le 16/09/2016 13:15, KatolaZ a écrit :
> > On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 12:24:45PM +0200, Didier Kryn wrote:
> >
> > [cut]
> >
> >> Steve,
> >>
> >> I like more and more this idea of separating the tasks:
> >> -
On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 12:24:45 +0200
Didier Kryn wrote:
> Steve,
>
> I like more and more this idea of separating the tasks:
> - pid1 (sysvinit or whatever) performs one-shot startups and
> basic supervision (like for getty),
sysvinit, right? Spawn your gettys and
> On September 16, 2016 at 9:51 AM Didier Kryn wrote:
>
> Le 16/09/2016 13:15, KatolaZ a écrit :
> > On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 12:24:45PM +0200, Didier Kryn wrote:
> >
> > [cut]
> >
> >> Steve,
> >>
> >> I like more and more this idea of separating the tasks:
> >> -
On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 12:16:03PM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
[cut]
>
> Hi KatolaZ,
>
> The preceding paragraph represents a philosophy more than anything
> else. It's the philosophy that your computer must never, ever, for any
> reason ever become unresponsive. You share that philosophy with
On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 12:15:01 +0100
KatolaZ wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 12:24:45PM +0200, Didier Kryn wrote:
>
> [cut]
>
> >
> > Steve,
> >
> > I like more and more this idea of separating the tasks:
> > - pid1 (sysvinit or whatever) performs one-shot
On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 03:51:43PM +0200, Didier Kryn wrote:
[cut]
> Nobody supervises pid1, OK? So why would the supervisor need to be
> supervised? It is supposed to be rock solid. Note that it can be barely
> relaunched by sysvinit in the same way as getty.
>
Yep, but if a supervisor
Le 16/09/2016 13:15, KatolaZ a écrit :
On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 12:24:45PM +0200, Didier Kryn wrote:
[cut]
Steve,
I like more and more this idea of separating the tasks:
- pid1 (sysvinit or whatever) performs one-shot startups and basic
supervision (like for getty),
-
Am Freitag, 16. September 2016 schrieb KatolaZ:
> That looks like a great plan, but who will supervise the supervisors?
> :)
The NSA .. or BND ... . If you don't have something to hide, then you have
nothing to fear ;-)
--
Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also
On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 12:24:45PM +0200, Didier Kryn wrote:
[cut]
>
> Steve,
>
> I like more and more this idea of separating the tasks:
> - pid1 (sysvinit or whatever) performs one-shot startups and basic
> supervision (like for getty),
> - services needing a sophisticated
Le 16/09/2016 12:02, Steve Litt a écrit :
On Thu, 15 Sep 2016 12:31:28 -1000
Joel Roth wrote:
emnin...@riseup.net wrote:
Am Mon, 12 Sep 2016 08:31:54 +
schrieb Jaromil :
not at all. We even plan to roll out our own openrc package,
ditching the one
On Thu, 15 Sep 2016 12:31:28 -1000
Joel Roth wrote:
> emnin...@riseup.net wrote:
> > Am Mon, 12 Sep 2016 08:31:54 +
> > schrieb Jaromil :
> >
> > > not at all. We even plan to roll out our own openrc package,
> > > ditching the one from Debian which has
emnin...@riseup.net wrote:
> Am Mon, 12 Sep 2016 08:31:54 +
> schrieb Jaromil :
>
> > not at all. We even plan to roll out our own openrc package, ditching
> > the one from Debian which has many problems. Perhaps what you are
> > hitting is one of them.
> >
> > For Devuan's
Am Mon, 12 Sep 2016 08:31:54 +
schrieb Jaromil :
> not at all. We even plan to roll out our own openrc package, ditching
> the one from Debian which has many problems. Perhaps what you are
> hitting is one of them.
>
>
> For Devuan's Openrc we will follow the design
On 12/09/2016 10:32, Jaromil wrote:
> ...
>
> (the above space is left intentionally blank for conspiracy theorists)
>
> Openrc in Debian coul be labeled as a "self hating package",
> I recommend you compile from source until we provide an openrc
> package.
The same could be said regarding the
On Sun, 11 Sep 2016, emnin...@riseup.net wrote:
> Am Sun, 11 Sep 2016 18:09:56 +0200
> schrieb Svante Signell :
>
> > Maybe you have to install sys-rc before installing openrc?
>
> I looked and i have already installed sysv-rc. In any case, i did a
> re-install but it
Quoting emnin...@riseup.net (emnin...@riseup.net):
> I was away from the keyboard a very long time (had to work
> outside/outdoor for a life), so very likely i missed a lot. Sorry in
> anticipation if i'm doubling something:
>
> One system is/was running devuan ascii quite nicely but when i came
On Sun, 2016-09-11 at 23:41 +0200, emnin...@riseup.net wrote:
> Am Sun, 11 Sep 2016 18:09:56 +0200
> schrieb Svante Signell :
>
> >
> > Maybe you have to install sys-rc before installing openrc?
>
> The version is 0.21-2.
>
> Do you mean sysv-rc or sys-rc indeed?
Am Sun, 11 Sep 2016 18:09:56 +0200
schrieb Svante Signell :
> Maybe you have to install sys-rc before installing openrc?
I looked and i have already installed sysv-rc. In any case, i did a
re-install but it did not help.
Does that mean openrc as an option for devuan is
Am Sun, 11 Sep 2016 18:09:56 +0200
schrieb Svante Signell :
> On Sun, 2016-09-11 at 17:44 +0200, emnin...@riseup.net wrote:
> > I was away from the keyboard a very long time (had to work
> > outside/outdoor for a life), so very likely i missed a lot. Sorry in
> >
On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 17:44:19 +0200
wrote:
> One system is/was running devuan ascii quite nicely but when i came
> back i did an 'apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade' and i
> realize(d), that openrc (which i was used to use) was removed.
[snip]
>
> Anyway, any pointer
On Sun, 2016-09-11 at 17:44 +0200, emnin...@riseup.net wrote:
> I was away from the keyboard a very long time (had to work
> outside/outdoor for a life), so very likely i missed a lot. Sorry in
> anticipation if i'm doubling something:
>
> One system is/was running devuan ascii quite nicely but
I was away from the keyboard a very long time (had to work
outside/outdoor for a life), so very likely i missed a lot. Sorry in
anticipation if i'm doubling something:
One system is/was running devuan ascii quite nicely but when i came
back i did an 'apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade' and i
On Thu, 26 May 2016 12:50:19 +0200
Svante Signell wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-05-26 at 11:28 +0200, emnin...@riseup.net wrote:
>
> Please keep the subject, even if you are reading the mails via the
> Digest service!
In addition, if you respond to a digest subjected email,
On Thu, 26 May 2016 01:53:07 +0200
Dragan FOSS wrote:
> On 05/26/2016 01:23 AM, Steve Litt wrote:
> > capability of respawning daemons that crash? OpenRC can't do that.
>
> OpenRC *can* do that:
>
> ---
> Automatic respawning crashed services
> ---
>
>
Am Thu, 26 May 2016 12:50:19 +0200
schrieb Svante Signell :
> On Thu, 2016-05-26 at 11:28 +0200, emnin...@riseup.net wrote:
>
> Please keep the subject, even if you are reading the mails via the
> Digest service!
You're right! Sorry about that, i was too fast :-( Btw,
On Thu, 2016-05-26 at 11:28 +0200, emnin...@riseup.net wrote:
Please keep the subject, even if you are reading the mails via the
Digest service!
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Le 26/05/2016 01:23, Steve Litt a écrit :
Many people feel that respawning is a pact with the devil: If something
crashes, it should stay crashed for further investigation rather than
"painting over it" with a respawn. If you feel that way, OpenRC is a
good bet.
The arguments pro and cons
On 05/26/2016 01:23 AM, Steve Litt wrote:
capability of respawning daemons that crash? OpenRC can't do that.
OpenRC *can* do that:
---
Automatic respawning crashed services
---
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/OpenRC
___
Dng mailing list
On Tue, 24 May 2016 14:06:33 +0200
wrote:
> Is there a link to an instruction how to use (and setup) openrc
> together with sysvinit?
>
> I'd like to use openrc as a tool to administrate daemons and services
> since i find it a lot more "logical" (easy?).
Before you do
On 05/24/2016 02:06 PM, emnin...@riseup.net wrote:
Is there a link to an instruction how to use (and setup) openrc
together with sysvinit?
I'd like to use openrc as a tool to administrate daemons and services
since i find it a lot more "logical" (easy?).
TRIOS Mia is fully functional Debian
On Tue, 24 May 2016 14:06:33 +0200, Emninger wrote:
> Is there a link to an instruction how to use (and setup) openrc
> together with sysvinit?
DISCLAIMER: I never tried that, so please take my
suggestions with a buckload of salt. (Corrections welcome!)
Having that out of the way: There is
Is there a link to an instruction how to use (and setup) openrc
together with sysvinit?
I'd like to use openrc as a tool to administrate daemons and services
since i find it a lot more "logical" (easy?). One question for example
is, if can be used the (needed) openrc scripts from other distros
Le 04/05/2016 15:44, Rob Owens a écrit :
- Original Message -
From: "Didier Kryn"
Le 03/05/2016 19:10, Rob Owens a écrit :
Yes, but then when an openrc user wants to start/stop a service, he
cannot do '/etc/init.d/myservice start' like he could do on any other
OS using
upstart is init subsystem which is using same names for binaries; commands
as sysvinit probably to be a drop in replacement, not ment to coexist with
sysvinit.
sysv-rc,openrc , file-rc all depend on init binary daemon and are
replacements for init.d/rc(S) files which init binary executes. so they
On Wed, 4 May 2016 09:54:37 -0400 (EDT)
Rob Owens wrote:
> - Original Message -
> > From: "Steve Litt"
>
> > On Tue, 3 May 2016 10:06:07 -0400 (EDT)
> > Rob Owens wrote:
> >
> >> I agree with putting each init in its own
If I had to be and admin of mixture of linux distributions I would
probably use 'service', instead of remembering all commands suited for
different init flavours and checking on which box I'm about to run a
command.
But in such a case I probably would not care what kind of init
subsystem is
On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 09:44:30AM -0400, Rob Owens wrote:
Normally *this* admin never uses the service command because:
You should because the service command cleans the environment. If you do
„/etc/init.d/ start” you can have strange results.
1) it is not available on all distros or may
- Original Message -
> From: "Steve Litt"
> On Tue, 3 May 2016 10:06:07 -0400 (EDT)
> Rob Owens wrote:
>
>> I agree with putting each init in its own directory, but sysvinit
>> should not own /etc/init.d. sysvinit stuff should go in
Robert Storey writes:
> For whatever it's worth, I'm fully supportive of the idea of defaulting to
> a simpler init system such as S6, Epoch, Runit, you-name-it. I can't speak
> for anyone else, of course, but I tend to think the sort of people who are
> attracted to
- Original Message -
> From: "Didier Kryn"
> Le 03/05/2016 19:10, Rob Owens a écrit :
>> Yes, but then when an openrc user wants to start/stop a service, he
>> cannot do '/etc/init.d/myservice start' like he could do on any other
>> OS using openrc. He'd have to do
On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 08:10:40AM +0100, Simon Hobson wrote:
> Steve Litt wrote:
>
> > There's a special place in hell for people using ambiguous
> > abbreviations, acronyms, and nicknames.
>
> You mean, like the whole IT industry - and in fact pretty well any
Steve Litt escribió:
[...]
I think the only daemons you really need in an installer are the
gettys, sshd, wpa_supplicant and dhcpcd. And you'll probably want
the display manager too. Those obviously must be included in packages.
The more obscure stuff can exist first
On Wed, 04 May 2016 06:47:06 +
Noel Torres wrote:
> Steve Litt escribió:
>
> > On Mon, 2 May 2016 22:15:44 -1000
> > Joel Roth wrote:
> >
> >
> >> The problem with supporting multiple init systems is that
> >> there is an
On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 01:03:08PM +0800, Robert Storey wrote:
> For whatever it's worth, I'm fully supportive of the idea of defaulting to
> a simpler init system such as S6, Epoch, Runit, you-name-it.
Many people agree that sysvinit with its symlinks and run
levels is overly complex for the
Steve Litt wrote:
> There's a special place in hell for people using ambiguous
> abbreviations, acronyms, and nicknames.
You mean, like the whole IT industry - and in fact pretty well any industry ?
Such terms are routinely used because they make speech and writing
Steve Litt escribió:
On Mon, 2 May 2016 22:15:44 -1000
Joel Roth wrote:
The problem with supporting multiple init systems is that
there is an init script for each service that has to be
ported or rewritten.
[...]
It's a documentation task. If
On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 12:55:09AM -0400, Peter Olson wrote:
> > On May 3, 2016 at 11:43 PM Joel Roth wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > Interesting, I thought /sbin was historically for statically
> > linked executables needed at boot time, or for system
> > recovery.
>
> The /sbin and
Jim Murphy escribió:
[...]
UNIX and lookalikes have been able to boot into single user mode
with a small root filesystem without the need for /usr, /var or ...
There are still admins that have split any number of these directories
into their own filesystems for various
Am Tue, 03 May 2016 08:27:05 +
schrieb dng-requ...@lists.dyne.org:
> From: parazyd <para...@dyne.org>
> To: Hendrik Boom <hend...@topoi.pooq.com>
> Cc: dng@lists.dyne.org
> Subject: Re: [DNG] OpenRC and Devuan
> Message-ID: <20160503071226.GA10101@hansolo>
&g
For whatever it's worth, I'm fully supportive of the idea of defaulting to
a simpler init system such as S6, Epoch, Runit, you-name-it. I can't speak
for anyone else, of course, but I tend to think the sort of people who are
attracted to Devuan see the virtue of simplicity. The main reason why we
> On May 3, 2016 at 11:43 PM Joel Roth wrote:
[...]
> Interesting, I thought /sbin was historically for statically
> linked executables needed at boot time, or for system
> recovery.
The /sbin and /usr/sbin are analogous to /bin and /usr/sbin but they contain
programs for
Steve Litt wrote:
> Joel Roth wrote:
>
> > Hendrik Boom wrote:
> > > There's a small number of directories that are supposed to be on
> > > the root filesystem, or otherwise available during boot. I
> > > believe /etc and /bin are two of these.
> > >
> > > /usr is not. I
On Tue, 3 May 2016 15:24:47 -1000
Joel Roth wrote:
> Hendrik Boom wrote:
> > There's a small number of directories that are supposed to be on
> > the root filesystem, or otherwise available during boot. I
> > believe /etc and /bin are two of these.
> >
> > /usr is not. I
* On 2016 03 May 16:38 -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
> "Pen testing" My Aunt's Hat!
I thought it was trying different Linux distributions from a USB pen.
Shrug.
- Nate
--
"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all
possible worlds. The pessimist fears this is true."
Ham radio,
Hendrik Boom wrote:
> There's a small number of directories that are supposed to be on the
> root filesystem, or otherwise available during boot. I believe /etc
> and /bin are two of these.
>
> /usr is not. I suspect /var isn't either.
>
> init is supposed to be able to read /etc/fstab to
On Tue, 03 May 2016 23:07:05 +0200
Svante Signell wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-05-03 at 16:32 -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
> > On Tue, 3 May 2016 10:06:07 -0400 (EDT)
> >
> > Because OpenRC has seen fit to intermix their init scripts
> > with sysvinit's in /etc/init.d, I'd
On Tue, 2016-05-03 at 23:24 +0200, parazyd wrote:
> On Tue, 03 May 2016, Svante Signell wrote:
>
> As I've stated at the beginning of this whole thread, debian-openrc is
> irrelevant and a bad way to solve the whole issue of using OpenRC
> properly, becase they keep using LSB initscripts...
What
Thanks Stephanie!
There's a special place in hell for people using ambiguous
abbreviations, acronyms, and nicknames. I mean really, do they think
this makes them sound more "in the know?"
That author is a WAD. Now I get to feel superior as the word WAD rolls
glibly and effortlessly off my
On Tue, 03 May 2016, Svante Signell wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-05-03 at 23:05 +0200, parazyd wrote:
> > On Tue, 03 May 2016, Svante Signell wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > On Tue, 2016-05-03 at 16:32 -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 3 May 2016 10:06:07 -0400 (EDT)
> > > >
> > > > Because
On Tue, 2016-05-03 at 23:05 +0200, parazyd wrote:
> On Tue, 03 May 2016, Svante Signell wrote:
>
> >
> > On Tue, 2016-05-03 at 16:32 -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, 3 May 2016 10:06:07 -0400 (EDT)
> > >
> > > Because OpenRC has seen fit to intermix their init scripts
> > > with
On Tue, 03 May 2016, Svante Signell wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-05-03 at 16:32 -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
> > On Tue, 3 May 2016 10:06:07 -0400 (EDT)
> >
> > Because OpenRC has seen fit to intermix their init scripts
> > with sysvinit's in /etc/init.d, I'd suggest that any files needed by
> > OpenRC be
On Tue, 2016-05-03 at 16:32 -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
> On Tue, 3 May 2016 10:06:07 -0400 (EDT)
>
> Because OpenRC has seen fit to intermix their init scripts
> with sysvinit's in /etc/init.d, I'd suggest that any files needed by
> OpenRC be kept somewhere besides /etc/init.d.
>
Hi Steve,
We
On Tue, 03 May 2016, Steve Litt wrote:
> On Tue, 3 May 2016 10:06:07 -0400 (EDT)
> Rob Owens wrote:
>
>
> > I agree with putting each init in its own directory, but sysvinit
> > should not own /etc/init.d. sysvinit stuff should go in /etc/sysvinit
> > and by default
On Tue, 3 May 2016 10:06:07 -0400 (EDT)
Rob Owens wrote:
> I agree with putting each init in its own directory, but sysvinit
> should not own /etc/init.d. sysvinit stuff should go in /etc/sysvinit
> and by default /etc/init.d should be a link to /etc/sysvinit/init.d.
> The
Steven W. Scott wrote:
> Wow. Funny that, my view is:
> Windows: Gaming
> Linux: everything else
I am kind of a "hardcore" gamer,
nowadays especially in Sauerbraten
and Urban Terror, back then in RedEclipse,
I actually think that the situation with
games is good.
Count here 0 A.D., Battle
On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 02:16:55PM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
> On Tue, 3 May 2016 13:00:39 +0100
> KatolaZ wrote:
>
> > On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 06:32:41AM -0500, Jim Murphy wrote:
> >
> > [cut]
> >
> > >
> > > I know this is in the very early stages and where things go is
ve, on
> Windows? Lol!
>
> SWS
> On May 3, 2016 5:05 AM, "Go Linux" <goli...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 5/3/16, Mitt Green <mitt_gr...@riseup.net> wrote:
>>
>> Subject: Re: [DNG] OpenRC and Devuan
>> To: dng@lists.dyne.org
>>
:
> On Tue, 5/3/16, Mitt Green <mitt_gr...@riseup.net> wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: [DNG] OpenRC and Devuan
> To: dng@lists.dyne.org
> Date: Tuesday, May 3, 2016, 1:51 AM
>
> >> The current init system is old. Ancient.
> >> We should all agree on it. Devuan
On Tue, 3 May 2016 13:00:39 +0100
KatolaZ wrote:
> On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 06:32:41AM -0500, Jim Murphy wrote:
>
> [cut]
>
> >
> > I know this is in the very early stages and where things go is
> > still open to discussion, but consider this.
> >
> > UNIX and lookalikes
On Tue, 3 May 2016 12:18:13 +0100
KatolaZ wrote:
> Ideally, switching between init systems (e.g., reverting back to an
> init system which is known to work) should be achievable from a
> single-user root shell spawned as an emergency "init", using only a
> few executables
1 - 100 of 152 matches
Mail list logo