-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 07/04/2014 11:28 AM, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> Hi, > > Adam Borowski: >> There was enough trouble when udev needed an in-lockstep upgrade with the >> kernel a few releases back. If systemd components are going to need such >> forced reboots on a repeated basis, I don't like where this is going. >> > systemd and its components can re-exec themselves, that's not the problem. > > The problem is that along with systemd we're changing a lot of the > supporting infrastructure ("we" here is Upstream, for the most part). > > Keeping old low-level interfaces around just to avoid logging out or > rebooting may or may not be something we can do easily. While I'll > certainly be happy to be able to dist-upgrade without a subsequent reboot, > if it turns out that this is not going to be easy to achieve then so be it. > > For Zurg (Jessie+1), Has that name actually been formalized in any way? I still like it, but last I heard it wasn't officially anything more than a misunderstanding and a joke. > we're likely to switch to Wayland. How do you plan to do *that* > without forcing at least a re-login? It seems unlikely that that "switch" will involve removing X entirely, since many things will still rely on X, even if the X they rely on ends up getting run nested inside of Wayland (as I believe is a supported scenario, exactly for backwards-compatibility reasons). As such, anything that relies on X should still be able to keep working, as long as the existing X session continues running. It's just that anything that relies on Wayland won't be able to work until the restart is done. - From my perspective, that's perfectly acceptable; everything that was working before continues to work, but you don't get the new functionality until you restart. If that's *not* the case - if things that rely on X will break, or (more likely) if some of the things which people use will be upgraded from versions which rely on X to versions which rely on Wayland - then at the very least a pre-upgrade warning should be provided, with the opportunity to cancel / postpone the upgrade. One of the things people have been asking for, when it comes to systemd, is such a warning in the form of a debconf prompt; however, there seems to be resistance to that idea, and indeed I'm not sure it hasn't been outright rejected. - -- The Wanderer Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny. A government exists to serve its citizens, not to control them. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJTts+yAAoJEASpNY00KDJru+oP/jmer/NUQ46fexoIW3n2D9BR fsAaPAIZdh8MciNtdyrxRksev5f5nrCuP8g9Pw8jV9XbXZh2cuS4sJWKwLpqupc5 nl1e2NVAiGu16J74zVrUd97haAPYQ80Vg7D5LXKDH5wqojbXZQ+w44GY3oNbmNG8 oYKArEFgSoIXIR9MWCOz4pMLUegeeS93keZqdQ7I+TPPZc5keif3EZzoib4uDp9v r3F4L4kvSlSmjvKfZq+DyVrwgSPRMtyoxTK8tXdhLxcUZvlQV6TSFsD9iTGY3piZ Jja+mVZicFGtBt5iQ/WeC3KGjkyao0/wfmgn26IiIsvPoRIB8a/RKHVmHIi7R+uK cs/wFCS6jzs1Z5r1QZpT3Bo4smgtAPkSKGhF1ldYBZqZlrn362BN+plSLi1fhQtw 7QOzdl+JI9sbMxWw/WtXqpBlaGKTUJiPoom7oUg+Y+K21AWUNw/ygWbzpB3SHjK8 EGvuSeAFr3E8d9U1tUHNT+Msca9L23aGsreXAh4xnUQOQj60brJLUBodlTVSapGs DRaNSOE0l/JEn3mQ1tpx0C9b263V4uVf/cOpXpyLBdOpCukSs6UunZ/IgVwUoG7U 3DTuVyKidG2SvGeyQ8nKZyJ2kMbj548+0MGQR9Tvqn/65tklu8tsxnxIK0r/lMlH IxRJHxEqa+q+4iP1wsvv =fPU6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53b6cfb2.6030...@fastmail.fm