Am 02.10.2012 16:13, schrieb Lennart Poettering: > On Sat, 29.09.12 18:28, Reindl Harald ([email protected]) wrote: > there is really no need to word your questions the way you are doing. I > will ban you from this mailing list if you don't stop being so dramatic > and insulting.
seems like people on mailing-lists are a little hypersensitive > The simple fact is that systemd was merely the messenger of something > that has changed in the kernel long ago. Don't yell at the messenger. guys in bugreports are saying the change came from systemd-guys - so as user i believe them > To me it appears that the right fix is to patch df to coalesce the lines > of the various mount points of the same backing fs. it should just show > them as the rightmost column, comma separated, and if there are too > many, it should just allipsize the list instead of showing them all. no need for any additional output df = DISK free mount = mounts > Anyway, this is mostly something between coreutils and the kernel, and > the way how df parses and presents the information of the > kernel. systemd has no role in this. Please (politely!) ask the > coreutils maintainers to coalesce mounts like this. the problem here is that since more than a year and TWO fedora-releases averybody is pointig to another one and nobody feels responsible nor cares really >> will this behavior get fixed in my lifetime? >> the alias for "df" is a dirty solution > > Try being constructive for once: if there's an itch you really want to > have scratched then there's always the option to just fix it yourself > and send a patch upstream. This is how open source works, after all. if i could i would have done a year ago i am web-developer and in this category i write EVERY single piece of software and library by myself since many years to avoid random incomaptible changes and troubles with lazy developers not compatible with recent php on dist-upgrades and yes i am doing this for some hundret domains since 2003, fully automated updates and a 100% clean codebase with not a single behavior change for existing projects and modules on error_reporting E_STRICT in prodcution that's the way i work and there it does not matter if i get paied for a piece of work or doing it just for fun - the quality and NERVER BEAK BEHAVIOR is always the same the big difference is that if breakage is needed i feel also resposible to wait until all depedning pieces of code are prepared, migrations in any direction are running 100% perfect and no matter how long it takes - finally you will see a update with party dramatical changes in API's but without any beahvior change for a user or any warning/error message > Anyway, please stop posting things in the style you are posting them in > here. This is not LKML, and in contrast to LKML we do not reward > insulting people here. if i would not have made and commented two bugreports more than a year ago with no reaction for a behavior change which never should have happened this way with no other reaction than different developers are pointing in different directions and nobody feels resposible i would not have written any message
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
