Hi
I have a working 2.0 installed. How can I switch it to 3.0 to continue
learning ways to incorporate /etc/net into PLD?
--
DO4-UANIC
___
pld-devel-en mailing list
pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org
On Sunday 11 December 2005 02:38, Tomasz Pala wrote:
On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 01:23:12 +0100, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote:
Small chances for such think to work, as many of our services shall
return HGW instead of DONE.
Huh? You seem to have no idea how supervising is usually done. The
On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 14:06:39 +0100, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote:
background for user but foreground for supervising process. We don't use it
I see. However I'm afraid there will be problems with services starting
a few different processes, like jabber (router, resolver, sn, c2s, s2s).
I
It's ok as long, as we make ISO-s from time to time.
That is the part of always in developement idea.
I can't see what's
bothering ppl bout dying ac and th. Windows 98 and 95 and ME died as well,
other distros also make new versions and move on forward.
For me personally if we will
On Sunday 11 of December 2005 12:47, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's ok as long, as we make ISO-s from time to time. I can't see what's
blah blah blah
bothering ppl bout dying ac and th. Windows 98 and 95 and ME died as well,
other distros also make new versions and move on forward. There is no
On Sun, 11 Dec 2005, Tomasz Pala wrote:
On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 14:06:39 +0100, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote:
I don't care about faster startup. I care only about one thing - start
service
again if it died.
Such watchdog can be simply created by croning `service [/etc/init.d/*]
status`.
On Sunday 11 December 2005 03:38, Tomasz Pala wrote:
No idea. Maybe bind requires network while zebra becomes part of network
when it's installed?
bind requires interfaces (to bind to) - that's for sure. But how about
routing? Dependency means 'can stand up and WILL work if...' (bind to
On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 02:45:22PM +0100, Marcin Król wrote:
It's ok as long, as we make ISO-s from time to time.
That is the part of always in developement idea.
I can't see what's
bothering ppl bout dying ac and th. Windows 98 and 95 and ME died as well,
other distros also make
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dnia Sat, 10 Dec 2005 22:34:31 +0100, Adam Gołębiowski
[EMAIL PROTECTED] napisał:
In case you didn't notice, NEST was disbaned some time ago.
In deed I didn't - so it was? Didn't know that - sry
Nevertheless don't make a second NEST out of TH!?
NEST was
Dnia Sun, 11 Dec 2005 14:47:45 +0100, Daniel Dominik Rudnicki
[EMAIL PROTECTED] napisał:
let jut RMs and CDG do the job ok ?
blah blah blah
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to The Dark Side -
Yoda
___
Dnia Sun, 11 Dec 2005 14:52:49 +0100, Adam Gołębiowski
[EMAIL PROTECTED] napisał:
On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 02:45:22PM +0100, Marcin Król wrote:
1) Maintain my machines, by simply doing poldek --upgrade-dist out of
stable tree. Occasionally there will be need to do some manual upgrades
like
On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 08:52:36 -0500, Andrew A. Gill wrote:
That's a very ugly solution. I haven't been following this
init.d discussion too closely, but what you're proposing is
ugly.
Daemons shouldn't die and they don't without any reason. I've got only
one broken - ospf, if you have
On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 03:54:20PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dnia Sun, 11 Dec 2005 14:52:49 +0100, Adam Gołębiowski
[EMAIL PROTECTED] napisał:
On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 02:45:22PM +0100, Marcin Król wrote:
1) Maintain my machines, by simply doing poldek --upgrade-dist out of
stable
Tomasz Pala wrote:
On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 08:52:36 -0500, Andrew A. Gill wrote:
That's a very ugly solution. I haven't been following this
init.d discussion too closely, but what you're proposing is
ugly.
Daemons shouldn't die and they don't without any reason. I've got only
one
Dnia Sun, 11 Dec 2005 16:07:23 +0100, Jakub Bogusz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
napisał:
And what can I do with ISO full of security holes (or other serious
bugs), with only binary-incompatible updates on ftp?
Every sytem gets outdated and with security holes with time. We do the
main ftp the best w
On Sunday 11 of December 2005 15:51, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
blah blah blah
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
yep
--
Daniel Dominik Rudnicki
JID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgplvfKSYP7nf.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 16:10:19 +0100, Jakub Piotr Cłapa wrote:
The startup time with init-ng is proved to be less than a half compared
to plain SysVinit.
With 3-6 months uptimes it's irrevelant if restart due to new kernel
takes 5 or 10 minutes.
My conclusion coming from this discussion is
But think about big transitions, such as gcc - when most of
C++/Fortran/Ada/GCJ-based Java stuff must be rebuilt. And many programs
appear broken, so they wouldn't exist in distro even for few months.
All those programs will not exist, but just in devel tree on ftp. They
however will still
On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 04:31:33PM +0100, Tomasz Pala wrote:
On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 16:10:19 +0100, Jakub Piotr Cłapa wrote:
The startup time with init-ng is proved to be less than a half compared
to plain SysVinit.
With 3-6 months uptimes it's irrevelant if restart due to new kernel
=?UTF-8?B?TWFyY2luIEtyw7Ns?= wrote:
I can't see what's
bothering ppl bout dying ac and th. Windows 98 and 95 and ME died as well,
other distros also make new versions and move on forward.
For me personally if we will switch to awlays in developement distro
it would be easier to:
Dnia Sun, 11 Dec 2005 16:31:33 +0100, Tomasz Pala [EMAIL PROTECTED]
napisał:
My conclusion coming from this discussion is that's desktop solution,
not server one. Am I right?
The equasion is simple - I see new functionality added, few new fatures,
faster boot and nothing taken - so, where
Dnia Sun, 11 Dec 2005 21:06:58 +0100, Andrzej Krzysztofowicz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] napisał:
- building a bugfix package and move it to main - not possible because of
incompatible builder envinronment
- ???
These two alternatives are where we should search for a way out. Or we
hold an
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Marcin_Kr=F3l?= wrote:
Upgrade from Ra to Ac == 1 night at server room for every production
machine. And this will IMO not change in Ac-Th transition or any other
leater X-Y transition.
Have you seen a distro that supports full machine upgrade (incl.
configuration
Have you seen a distro that supports full machine upgrade (incl.
configuration fixes/rewrites) in less than one night ?
Of course not, but less differences == less time in server room. Which
leads me to conclusion: no matter what philosophy we will choose we
should be releasing stable
On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 18:56:28 +0100, Jacek Konieczny wrote:
Irrevelant? My customers _do_ care if a maintenance break (e.g. reboot
during kernel upgrate) lasts 5 or 10 minutes.
If so, why don't you use some HA? Anyway I simply do not believe, that
it's 'proven' to be two times faster,
On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 19:01:55 +0100, Jacek Konieczny wrote:
That would be in an ideal world. Daemons have resource leaks and will be
To my information: which one?
killed when reach the resource limit (with process supervision ulimit
becomes very usefull).
Hmmm... what's with ulimit
On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 21:29:59 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
These two alternatives are where we should search for a way out. Or we
hold an enviroment to build patches and so on (the question is how long
and how many steps back).
The '???' alternative sound great - but we have to
On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 12:52:33AM +0100, adamg wrote:
Author: adamgDate: Sun Dec 11 23:52:33 2005 GMT
Module: SPECS Tag: HEAD
Log message:
- pass -DHAVE_STRUCT_DQBLK_DQB_CURBLOCKS (makes it build)
Files affected:
SPECS:
On Mon, 12 Dec 2005, Adam Gołębiowski wrote:
In glibc-2.3.6 (Ac) /usr/include/sys/quota.h::struct dqblk has curspace
member, while glibc-2.3.90 (Th) has curblocks.
What do we do with these? Branch it now or wait till Ac gets released?
AC-branch is your friend.
Or better apply some checks
Tomasz Pala wrote:
It's nice solution for fast system startup (but I doubt it's
signifficant change - do me a favour and add '' at the end of
/etc/rc.d/rc line 213 to check it please). Process supervising if
configurable can be nice feature too, but for me it's not worth risking
mass murder
That would probably require some hacking. You could try to install Th
from scratch into a chroot on another partition and than try to boot
from it. It should be more secure than installing from scratch.
Is there any documentation on installing 3.0 from scratch?
--
DO4-UANIC
31 matches
Mail list logo
