On Thu, 18 Jan 2018, Guillermo wrote:
> And
>
> $ grep 'define NCURSES_CONST' /usr/include/curses.h
>
> probably says:
>
> #define NCURSES_CONST /*nothing*/
>
> Correct?
Correct.
bash-4.2$ grep 'define NCURSES_CONST' /usr/include/curses.h
#define NCURSES_CONST /*nothing*/
bash-4.2$
On Wed, 17 Jan 2018, mobinmob wrote:
> There is a maintained fork in github:
>
> https://github.com/madscientist42/runit
The changelog doesn't suggest that there is maintenance going on - mostly
just unnecessary change in the build process.
...
Tue, 15 Aug 2017
* Reworked directory
On Tue, 16 Jan 2018, Jonathan de Boyne Pollard wrote:
> This is a problem that I thought was confined to OpenBSD, and its
> not-|const|-correct ncurses library. Certainly this has never been a problem
> on Debian nor on FreeBSD, and M. Caravia did not report any lack of
> |const|-correctness on
OK, with pax installed, but gets a lot further.
Now seeing these many times:
/usr/include/curses.h:843:31: error: initializing argument 1 of 'char*
tigetstr(char*)' [-fpermissive]
service-status.cpp:148:21: error: invalid conversion from 'const char*' to
'char*' [-fpermissive]
s =
On Tue, 16 Jan 2018, Jonathan de Boyne Pollard wrote:
> Charlie Brady:
>
> > Sorry, doesn't work for me:
> >
> You need a POSIX-conformant system with all of the POSIX utilities, including
> |pax| <http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/pax.ht
On Mon, 15 Jan 2018, Charlie Brady wrote:
> > 1) package/compile: you'll need "redo" to build
>
> Sorry, doesn't work for me:
>
> bash-4.2$ package/compile
> redo: ERROR: all: Cannot find .do file to use.
> bash-4.2$ sh -ex package/compile
> + '[' '!'
On Mon, 15 Jan 2018, Thomas Caravia wrote:
> I'm not familiar with rpm but my packaging is just this:
>
> 1) package/compile: you'll need "redo" to build
Sorry, doesn't work for me:
bash-4.2$ package/compile
redo: ERROR: all: Cannot find .do file to use.
bash-4.2$ sh -ex package/compile
+
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Charlie Brady wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Jan 2018, Avery Payne wrote:
>
> > I am guessing the differences will be subtle, and most of the general
> > behavior you desire will remain the same. You may be able to get a way
> > with a "sed 's/sv\ /s6-sv
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018, Laurent Bercot wrote:
> >If you are a systemd user, chances are you do not need s6.
> >
> >Really? So all the criticism of systemd is bunkum?
>
> :) I need to update this page.
> What this means is that systemd does provide a supervision
> infrastructure, so for people
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018, Avery Payne wrote:
> I am guessing the differences will be subtle, and most of the general
> behavior you desire will remain the same. You may be able to get a way
> with a "sed 's/sv\ /s6-sv\ /' new-script-name" on some of
> your scripts; give it a try, what could it hurt?
On Fri, 16 Jan 2015, Wayne Marshall wrote:
The better paradigm for dependency checking is this: for a service
with any unmet dependency, fail immediately.
That's great in theory, but can be very expensive in CPU and other
resources in practice. The dependency check code needs to be very
provided.
Very good to know.
Wayne
http://b0llix.net/perp/
On Fri, 16 Jan 2015 11:11:06 -0500 (EST)
Charlie Brady charlieb-supervis...@budge.apana.org.au wrote:
On Fri, 16 Jan 2015, Wayne Marshall wrote:
The better paradigm for dependency checking is this: for a service
On Fri, 10 Oct 2014, Avery Payne wrote:
Please point out anything that is missing.
Some programs require specific environment variables to be set. e.g.
dnscache expects $IP. Many programs will require $PATH to be set to work
correctly.
13 matches
Mail list logo
