Am 17.09.2015 um 03:08 schrieb Jon Stanley:
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 8:45 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
nonsense
4.1.x will get a lot more updates while 4.2.x get them too
systemd never ever had any minor release
That is the nonsense. 4.1.x is not maintained by the kernel
maintainer, but rather
Am 16.09.2015 um 17:52 schrieb Kok, Auke-jan H:
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 8:38 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 16.09.2015 um 17:13 schrieb Ahmed S. Darwish:
Not to mention that the same rolling-release model was adopted by
the kernel long time ago for similar reasons and much more ;-)
that is *
On Wed, 16.09.15 09:47, dott...@gmail.com (dott...@gmail.com) wrote:
> Now, as was written in that post, the project consists of over 69
> binaries, where most of them are entirely optional.
It's 119 executables now, btw.
> The problem with this project is not how it is written.
> It is how it i
Heya!
Please see:
http://0pointer.net/blog/preliminary-systemdconf-2015-schedule.html
We'd like to thank everybody who submitted a presentation proposal!
The response to the CfP was overwhelming, and our scheduled is now
packed with exciting talks!
See you in Berlin,
Lennart
--
Lennart Poett
On 16 September 2015 at 16:52, Kok, Auke-jan H wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 8:38 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>> Am 16.09.2015 um 17:13 schrieb Ahmed S. Darwish:
>>>
>>> Not to mention that the same rolling-release model was adopted by
>>> the kernel long time ago for similar reasons and much mor
dott...@gmail.com:
If systemd keeps going the way it does, it will eventually get forked,
[...]
Psst! This already happened, a year ago. Read
http://uselessd.darknedgy.net/ to learn what happened.
___
systemd-devel mailing list
systemd-devel
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 05:38:55PM +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 16.09.2015 um 17:13 schrieb Ahmed S. Darwish:
> >Not to mention that the same rolling-release model was adopted by
> >the kernel long time ago for similar reasons and much more ;-)
>
> that is *not* true and won't become tru
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 8:38 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
> Am 16.09.2015 um 17:13 schrieb Ahmed S. Darwish:
>>
>> Not to mention that the same rolling-release model was adopted by
>> the kernel long time ago for similar reasons and much more ;-)
>
> that is *not* true and won't become true by repeat
Am 16.09.2015 um 17:13 schrieb Ahmed S. Darwish:
Not to mention that the same rolling-release model was adopted by
the kernel long time ago for similar reasons and much more ;-)
that is *not* true and won't become true by repeat it
https://www.kernel.org/
mainline: 4.2 201
W dniu 16.09.2015 o 15:08, Martin Pitt pisze:
Michał Zegan [2015-09-16 14:41 +0200]:
I actually believe that debian does some splitting, for example pam-systemd
module is in a separate package. Actually I feel that particular case is
wrong, but it happens there. I mean debian jessie, of course
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 01:20:58PM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Thanks Colin for your reply!
>
> Colin Guthrie [2015-09-16 11:30 +0100]:
> > > Normally, you have a major version and a minor version. If the major
> > > version changes, it is an alarm to do throught testing to see if
> > > every
Hello,
no, the IP is fixed.
I want to bring the interface down to reduce power usage. This machine
has some special job where the LAN interface is only needed for about
one minute a day.
The idea is to enable the interface, start the software which does some
network interaction and after th
Michał Zegan [2015-09-16 14:41 +0200]:
> I actually believe that debian does some splitting, for example pam-systemd
> module is in a separate package. Actually I feel that particular case is
> wrong, but it happens there. I mean debian jessie, of course.
FYI, this is required for supporting Multi
I actually believe that debian does some splitting, for example
pam-systemd module is in a separate package. Actually I feel that
particular case is wrong, but it happens there. I mean debian jessie, of
course.
W dniu 16.09.2015 o 12:30, Colin Guthrie pisze:
I wouldn't normally grace such ran
Thanks Colin for your reply!
Colin Guthrie [2015-09-16 11:30 +0100]:
> > Normally, you have a major version and a minor version. If the major
> > version changes, it is an alarm to do throught testing to see if
> > everything works wellon the new one. Minor changes are minor, so they
> > require l
I wouldn't normally grace such rants with a reply, but I'll try and keep
this one short.
dott...@gmail.com wrote on 16/09/15 08:47:
> Hi, sorry for another rant, but I'm a software developer and a user of
> a Linux-based operating system here.
>
> I read the post about at 0pointer.de about "myths
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hi, sorry for another rant, but I'm a software developer and a user of
a Linux-based operating system here.
I read the post about at 0pointer.de about "myths about systemd". [1]
I want to address the issue of it being monolithic.
More specifically,
17 matches
Mail list logo
