On Mon, 23.02.15 12:41, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton (l...@lkcl.net) wrote:
Luke, you are now on moderation.
I am sorry, but I don't find what you are writing particularly useful
or new. You keep repeating the same untruths, and I'd prefer if we
could again focus on technical discussions on the m
Am 23.02.2015 um 13:41 schrieb Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton:
also misses the larger picture.
what the distros do is fait-accomplit driven by the decisions of the
upstream developers. what the upstream developers do is
fait-accomplit driven by the decisions of their dependencies.
everyone has
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 6:17 AM, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton [2015-02-23 2:08 +]:
>> the problem, zbigniew, is that the intended use of this "silent noop"
>> feature - to make it *possible* to have an alternative PID1 - *hasn't
>> happened*.
>
> It sure has. Debian supp
On Mon, 23.02.15 01:37, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton (l...@lkcl.net) wrote:
> > Convince the upstream developers
> > in question not to link against systemd's libraries, or convince the
> > distros not to package it like that.
>
> well, you could provide hints in the documentation (and force the
Hi Luke,
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 3:08 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
wrote:
> the problem, zbigniew, is that the intended use of this "silent noop"
> feature - to make it *possible* to have an alternative PID1 - *hasn't
> happened*. any upstream software developer who has added in support
> f
Hello Luke,
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 12:58 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
wrote:
>> I understood most of these dependencies to be indirect: Packages that
>> depend on other packages that in turn depend on libsystemd. Is that
>> correct?
>
> that's right. so, what that means is that the actual
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 02:08:26AM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> the problem, zbigniew, is that the intended use of this "silent noop"
> feature - to make it *possible* to have an alternative PID1 - *hasn't
> happened*. any upstream software developer who has added in support
> for
El 22/02/15 a las 22:37, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton escribió:
well, you could provide hints in the documentation (and force them to
be read by deliberately changing the API)
Wow.. so what you want is even nuttier than I thought..
that would be a good place to start, showing people how t
El 22/02/15 a las 23:08, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton escribió:
the problem, zbigniew, is that the intended use of this "silent noop"
feature - to make it *possible* to have an alternative PID1 - *hasn't
happened*. any upstream software developer who has added in support
for systemd has done
Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton [2015-02-23 2:08 +]:
> the problem, zbigniew, is that the intended use of this "silent noop"
> feature - to make it *possible* to have an alternative PID1 - *hasn't
> happened*.
It sure has. Debian supports systemd, SysV init, and to a lesser
degree OpenRC and up
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <
l...@lkcl.net> wrote:
> i don't know if you've seen this yet:
>
> http://news.slashdot.org/story/15/02/15/1959209/removing-libsystemd0-from-a-live-running-debian-system
>
> my name's luke leighton, i'm a software libre advocate, and
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 12:52 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 11:58:25PM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
>> ...except that its introduction (usually --with-libsystemd) in those
>> 100 (or so) packages has been done in a mutually-exclusive,
>> hard-comp
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 1:25 AM, Cameron Norman
wrote:
>>> ...except that its introduction (usually --with-libsystemd) in those
>>> 100 (or so) packages has been done in a mutually-exclusive,
>>> hard-compile-time switch that *excludes* the possibility of dynamic
>>> (runtime) decision-making.
>
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 10:00 AM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> On Tue, 17.02.15 20:24, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton (l...@lkcl.net) wrote:
>
>> i note that there was announcement recently that the systemd team
>> 'listens to users', so i am taking you at your word on that.
>
> Hmm, I am not aware
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 11:58:25PM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 9:10 AM, Tobias Hunger
>> wrote:
>> > Hi Luke,
>> >
>> > I am mostly a lurker on the systemd mailing list, so my opinion
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 11:58:25PM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 9:10 AM, Tobias Hunger
> wrote:
> > Hi Luke,
> >
> > I am mostly a lurker on the systemd mailing list, so my opinion does
> > not carry weight in this community.
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 9:10 AM, Tobias Hunger wrote:
> Hi Luke,
>
> I am mostly a lurker on the systemd mailing list, so my opinion does
> not carry weight in this community.
>
> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 9:24 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
> wrote:> so i'm not going to "protest" - i'm going to
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 9:35 PM, Michael Biebl wrote:
> There is no such dependency in Debian either [1].
> Luke simply has no idea what he is talking about.
> It would be great if Luke did some basic research and educate himself
> and not spread such misinformation.
michael,
greg's approach
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 9:25 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 08:24:37PM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
>> so i'm not going to "protest" - i'm going to try a different approach.
>> i'd like you to look at this list of debian packages that are
>> dependent on libsystemd0:
>>
On Tue, 17.02.15 20:24, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton (l...@lkcl.net) wrote:
> i note that there was announcement recently that the systemd team
> 'listens to users', so i am taking you at your word on that.
Hmm, I am not aware of such an "announcement". I generally listen
though, but I don't alw
Hi Luke,
I am mostly a lurker on the systemd mailing list, so my opinion does
not carry weight in this community.
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 9:24 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
wrote:> so i'm not going to "protest" - i'm going to
try a different approach.
> i'd like you to look at this list of de
2015-02-17 23:14 GMT+01:00 Michael Biebl :
> 2015-02-17 22:35 GMT+01:00 Michael Biebl :
>> 2015-02-17 22:25 GMT+01:00 Greg KH :
>>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 08:24:37PM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
>>> wrote:
so i'm not going to "protest" - i'm going to try a different approach.
i'd
2015-02-17 22:35 GMT+01:00 Michael Biebl :
> 2015-02-17 22:25 GMT+01:00 Greg KH :
>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 08:24:37PM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
>>> so i'm not going to "protest" - i'm going to try a different approach.
>>> i'd like you to look at this list of debian packages that
Hi Luke,
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 9:24 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
wrote:
> i note that there was announcement recently that the systemd team
> 'listens to users', so i am taking you at your word on that.
I believe we are listening a lot. That does not necessarily mean that
everyone will ge
2015-02-17 22:25 GMT+01:00 Greg KH :
> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 08:24:37PM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
>> so i'm not going to "protest" - i'm going to try a different approach.
>> i'd like you to look at this list of debian packages that are
>> dependent on libsystemd0:
>> http://lkcl
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 08:24:37PM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> so i'm not going to "protest" - i'm going to try a different approach.
> i'd like you to look at this list of debian packages that are
> dependent on libsystemd0:
> http://lkcl.net/reports/removing_systemd_from_debian/l
i don't know if you've seen this yet:
http://news.slashdot.org/story/15/02/15/1959209/removing-libsystemd0-from-a-live-running-debian-system
my name's luke leighton, i'm a software libre advocate, and the first
major contribution that i made to software libre was to help bridge
the impossible chas
27 matches
Mail list logo
