On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 4:17 AM, Pandu Poluan wrote:
> An example: A dev needs a newer version of a package. We upgrade it. It
> refuses to startup properly, but going back is out of the question because
> the dev *needs* the features only available in the new version. We check the
> (extremely) d
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 5:23 PM, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Dec 2012 13:14:46 -0600
> Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Kevin Chadwick
>> wrote:
>> > On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 17:38:15 -0600
>> > Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
>> >
>> >> In SysV, I can *write* the
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 4:40 PM, pk wrote:
> On 2012-12-28 20:01, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
>
>> Because I prefer Gentoo?
>
> That's what I really don't understand! You say you don't want to care
> about the system which implies Fedora or any other install-and-forget
> distro. I care about the sy
On Fri, 28 Dec 2012 13:14:46 -0600
Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Kevin Chadwick
> wrote:
> > On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 17:38:15 -0600
> > Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> >
> >> In SysV, I can *write* the daemon in the init script.
> >> In *that* sense, the init system te
On 2012-12-28 20:01, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> Because I prefer Gentoo?
That's what I really don't understand! You say you don't want to care
about the system which implies Fedora or any other install-and-forget
distro. I care about the system which is why I run Gentoo. Do you have
USE=* in ma
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Pandu Poluan wrote:
>
> On Dec 29, 2012 2:18 AM, "Canek Peláez Valdés" wrote:
>>
>> Stop thinking in sshd. I can write the *whole* daemon in shell, not in
>> another script file, but inside /etc/init.d/mystupiddaemon (or
>> /etc/rc.whatever); shell is Turing-compl
On Dec 29, 2012 2:18 AM, "Canek Peláez Valdés" wrote:
>
> Stop thinking in sshd. I can write the *whole* daemon in shell, not in
> another script file, but inside /etc/init.d/mystupiddaemon (or
> /etc/rc.whatever); shell is Turing-complete, I can write in it
> anything I can write in C (or in asse
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 17:38:15 -0600
> Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
>
>> In SysV, I can *write* the daemon in the init script.
>> In *that* sense, the init system tells the daemon how to do things,
>
> Please explain, sure there is the environ
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 12:15 PM, pk wrote:
> On 2012-12-28 00:24, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
>
>> Well, yeah, that's the point. I want to install Gentoo in my mother's
>> PC, and never have to go to her house because someting broke.
>
> I really don't have the time nor the inclination to continue
On 12/28/12 13:15, pk wrote:
> On 2012-12-28 00:24, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
>
>> Well, yeah, that's the point. I want to install Gentoo in my mother's
>> PC, and never have to go to her house because someting broke.
>
> I really don't have the time nor the inclination to continue this but...
>
On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 17:38:15 -0600
Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> In SysV, I can *write* the daemon in the init script.
> In *that* sense, the init system tells the daemon how to do things,
Please explain, sure there is the environment that tells a daemon what
to do. No shell can tell a c daemon l
On 2012-12-28 00:24, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> Well, yeah, that's the point. I want to install Gentoo in my mother's
> PC, and never have to go to her house because someting broke.
I really don't have the time nor the inclination to continue this but...
Why would you in that case install Gento
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 02:06:27AM +0100, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 27. Dezember 2012, 07:45:24 schrieb Pandu Poluan:
> > On Dec 26, 2012 1:05 AM, "Canek Peláez Valdés" wrote:
> > Even Linus piped up at one point, sharply reminding
> > Greg KH that even though udev was at one ti
Am Donnerstag, 27. Dezember 2012, 07:45:24 schrieb Pandu Poluan:
> On Dec 26, 2012 1:05 AM, "Canek Peláez Valdés" wrote:
> Even Linus piped up at one point, sharply reminding
> Greg KH that even though udev was at one time Greg's 'baby', at this point
> udev serves only the wants of the few.
link
On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 10:29 AM, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
>> * Finally, and what I think is the most fundamental difference between
>> systemd and almost any other init system: The service unit files in
>> systemd are *declarative*; you tell the daemon *what* to do, not *how*
>> to do it. If the ser
On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 10:00 AM, pk wrote:
> On 2012-12-27 02:14, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
>
>> I really think that's the crux of the matter Pandou: udev/systemd
>> serves to the wants of the many. The eudev fork serves to the wants of
>
> systemd+udev serves the "large mass" (users of mainly F
> * Finally, and what I think is the most fundamental difference between
> systemd and almost any other init system: The service unit files in
> systemd are *declarative*; you tell the daemon *what* to do, not *how*
> to do it. If the service files are shell scripts (like in
> OpenRC/SysV), everyth
On 2012-12-27 02:14, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> I really think that's the crux of the matter Pandou: udev/systemd
> serves to the wants of the many. The eudev fork serves to the wants of
systemd+udev serves the "large mass" (users of mainly Fedora and other
distros using systemd) that doesn't c
On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 7:14 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
[ snip ]
> I'm sorry if sounded like scoffing (certainly I don't remember
> scoffing anyone, at least consciously). I remember I praised Walt for
> doing the work for mdev. Do you remember that? I can dig the archives,
> but I'm pretty su
On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 6:45 PM, Pandu Poluan wrote:
>
> On Dec 26, 2012 1:05 AM, "Canek Peláez Valdés" wrote:
>
> {supersnip}
> Canek, I distinctly remember, at the very beginning of this brouhaha over
> udev requiring /usr to be mounted at boot time, you stated something along
> the lines of '
On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 5:51 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 6:01 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> I didn't started the thread, Wolfe did. I just answered his question
>> from my point of view.
>>
>> And, what community is being divided? Fedora,OpenSuse, and Arch us
On Dec 26, 2012 1:05 AM, "Canek Peláez Valdés" wrote:
{supersnip}
>
> So, no, I'm not trying to answer if you could "create a "/usr" service
> and make things dependent on /usr come after it's been mounted". I
> passed almost this entire thread because it's mostly people still
> hitting the same
On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 17:01:17 -0600
Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> And, what community is being divided? Fedora,OpenSuse, and Arch use
> systemd by default.
From debian and hurd to slackware which will not touch systemd ever and
ubuntu and also embedded with the kernel working on more and more
deep
On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 6:01 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
[snip]
> I didn't started the thread, Wolfe did. I just answered his question
> from my point of view.
>
> And, what community is being divided? Fedora,OpenSuse, and Arch use
> systemd by default. Gentoo derivative Exherbo recommends it
On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 4:19 PM, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Dec 2012 02:01:13 -0600
> Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
>
> To the OP of this OT sub-thread. The main difference for me is OpenRC
> removes some of the symlink mess and uncertainty compared to for
> example debians init. I very much
On Tue, 25 Dec 2012 08:56:38 -0500
Joshua Murphy wrote:
> It would still be a (notable, at that) drop
> in size if the shell script was redone to provide exactly the same set
> of features, then compared, but that size difference wouldn't have the
> same shock value as the comparison against 80+
On Tue, 25 Dec 2012 02:01:13 -0600
Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
To the OP of this OT sub-thread. The main difference for me is OpenRC
removes some of the symlink mess and uncertainty compared to for
example debians init. I very much like OpenRC but my fav is still
OpenBSD that tries to minimise the
On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 7:56 AM, Joshua Murphy wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 3:01 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
>> [ snip ]
>> * Really simple service unit files: The service unit files are really
>> small, really simple, really easy to understand/modify. Compare the 9
>> lines of sshd.servic
On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 7:14 AM, Michael Mol wrote:
>
> On Dec 25, 2012 3:04 AM, "Canek Peláez Valdés" wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 1:38 AM, G.Wolfe Woodbury
>> wrote:
>> [ snip ]
>> > From what has been happening with the systemd stuff, I do not see what
>> > advantages it really offers
On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 3:01 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> [ snip ]
> * Really simple service unit files: The service unit files are really
> small, really simple, really easy to understand/modify. Compare the 9
> lines of sshd.service:
>
> $ cat /etc/systemd/system/sshd.service
> [Unit]
> Desc
On 2012-12-25, Michael Mol wrote:
> Now, question: could I not create a "/usr" service and make things
> dependent on /usr come after it's been mounted? That seems the single, core
> missing piece.
This suffices for /usr on regular partitions. The problem is with more
complex stuff which, I assum
On Dec 25, 2012 3:04 AM, "Canek Peláez Valdés" wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 1:38 AM, G.Wolfe Woodbury
wrote:
> [ snip ]
> > From what has been happening with the systemd stuff, I do not see what
> > advantages it really offers over the SysV scheme and its successors like
> > OpenRC. Someon
On 12/25/2012 03:01 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 1:38 AM, G.Wolfe Woodbury wrote:
> [ snip ]
>> From what has been happening with the systemd stuff, I do not see what
>> advantages it really offers over the SysV scheme and its successors like
>> OpenRC. Someone enlight
On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 1:38 AM, G.Wolfe Woodbury wrote:
[ snip ]
> From what has been happening with the systemd stuff, I do not see what
> advantages it really offers over the SysV scheme and its successors like
> OpenRC. Someone enlighten me please?
I wrote the following some months ago; I th
On 12/24/2012 10:56 PM, Pandu Poluan wrote:
>
> Even back when hard disks are a mote in the eyes of today's mammoths,
> you *can* make /usr part of /, there's no stopping you. Sure, other
> SysAdmins may scoff and/or question your sanity, but the choice is
> yours. YOU know what's best for your pr
35 matches
Mail list logo
