On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 6:45 AM, Adam Borowski wrote:
> That would break their system as daemons have no way to notify the user
> something is wrong.
The user will not be notified even if the daemons send a mail to them.
I don't think any of the desktops GUIs that we ship know anything
about the
As someone who runs Debian on his smartphone, I completely agree with
making an MTA optional.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
Bjørn Mork wrote:
> Josh Triplett writes:
>> What would it take to make this change?
>
> Changing the LSB. Or you need to keep the sendmail interface. Which is
> what mail-transport-agent provides.
lsb-core provides the LSB interface, and it has priority extra, not
standard. It already has a d
Stephan Seitz wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 09:24:33PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
>> I still do not believe that portability is an issue, and please
>> remember that this would not force people to use an initramfs unless
>> they want to keep /usr on a standalone file system.
>
> Most of my syste
> Tollef Fog Heen writes:
> ]] Ivan Shmakov
> Tollef Fog Heen writes:
>>> (With the assumption that /usr is on a separate fs from /): You
>>> might very well need to load some drivers (be it network, FC, USB,
>>> SATA or something else) and probe some bits (iSCSI auth?) to
>>> a
Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 02:39:13PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
>> Popcon shows that ~65-70% of Debian systems have exim4 installed.
>> 30-35% of users cared enough to remove exim, and another 7% or so seem to
>> have configured their systems to stop running it (at boot or oth
On Oct 13, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> Using the inittamfs on my 6 storage servers (each 48 HDD 2 TB intern and
> the same extern)requires "rootdelay=3000" and longer. Working without
> reduce the average boottime to 12 minutes.
Looks like you need to work out what is going wrong with the initra
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 02:39:13PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> Popcon shows that ~65-70% of Debian systems have exim4 installed.
> 30-35% of users cared enough to remove exim, and another 7% or so seem to
> have configured their systems to stop running it (at boot or otherwise)
> without actually
Josh Triplett writes:
> What would it take to make this change?
Changing the LSB. Or you need to keep the sendmail interface. Which is
what mail-transport-agent provides.
> Have I missed any important points?
You forgot to explain the upside, reason, why, gain, whatever.
> Would any other
Hello Stephan Seitz,
Am 2011-10-12 22:20:50, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
> Most of my systems don’t use initramfs and have / and /usr on
> different file systems. I am no interested in changing this good
> tradition.
Here too...
Using the inittamfs on my 6 storage servers (each 48 HDD 2 TB in
I recently booted up a Debian Live "standard" image on a test system,
and noticed that it included a running instance of exim. Curious why a
live system would need an MTA, I found Debian Live's policy that the
"standard" image contains everything installed as part of a standard
Debian system (and
Hello Matt Zagrabelny,
Am 2011-10-11 11:21:30, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
> There are good arguments in the following link (Marco provided it with
> his initial email.)
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/UsrMove
I have read this too but what about systems which do not have an initr
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 09:24:33PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
The Debian initramfs of my sid system is 10 MB, while the one from my
My / (testing) is 193M, so I guess, I have much more „emergency” programs
available than you. The last time I was trapped within a initramfs, the
available progr
On Oct 12, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> On the other hand, Debian has chosen against that and relies on klibc,
> ipconfig, etc. for early userspace and thus, the initramfs. I suspect
> the main motivations behind these decisions were portability and size
> (please correct me and add references).
The
On 2011-10-12, Daniel Baumann wrote:
> On 10/12/2011 05:42 PM, Mathieu Trudel-Lapierre wrote:
>> Did you know about http://www.gobolinux.org/ ?
> gobolinux is iirc that project that aims to replicate what windows does:
> having every application (and it's depends) in one directory so that
> uninst
]] Ivan Shmakov
| > Tollef Fog Heen writes:
|
| > (With the assumption that /usr is on a separate fs from /): You might
| > very well need to load some drivers (be it network, FC, USB, SATA or
| > something else) and probe some bits (iSCSI auth?) to actually get to
| > the right block d
On 10/12/2011 05:42 PM, Mathieu Trudel-Lapierre wrote:
> Did you know about http://www.gobolinux.org/ ?
gobolinux is iirc that project that aims to replicate what windows does:
having every application (and it's depends) in one directory so that
uninstalling is a matter of removing a single direct
Hi,
Ana Guerrero wrote:
> Adrien, for this please ask in pkg-kde-talk@lists.alioth or in irc
> #debian-qt-kde.
thanks for the answer. So I will continue the discussion on pkg-kde-talk ;-)
Adrien
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe
Dear RIKS contact,
I'm happy to inform you of our latest introductory training course
"Land use modeling with Metronamica"
Since the first release of the Metronamica land use modeling software in 1998,
RIKS has organized many workshops and training courses to educate users on how
to work with
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 8:48 AM, Jon Dowland wrote:
[...]
>> oiow, someone with time should just make that trichotomy happen in FHS 3.0.
>
> I think there's a chicken-and-egg problem here: FHS want to document existing
> practice. Someone needs to put work into a runnable concept OS at the very
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Marco Balmer
* Package name: aspsms-t
Version : 1.3.0
Upstream Author : Marco Balmer
* URL : http://github.com/micressor/aspsms-t
* License : GPL-2
Programming Lang: Perl
Description : aspsms-t is a jabber/xmpp
Hi there!
On Wed, 12 Oct 2011 02:58:24 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> So let's look at the reasons against merging /usr in / listed in my
> final summary. All of them do not apply to merging / in /usr, and
> actually become arguments in favour of doing it:
[...]
> - dmcrypt: more parts would not nee
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 01:56:47PM +0200, Daniel Baumann wrote:
> moving / to /usr will take a lot of time in the linux ecosystem. since i
> prefere doing such a thing only once in a decade, going for the right
> thing directly is better than going for something incomplete first.
Sensible.
> oiow
Hi there!
On Wed, 12 Oct 2011 06:24:09 +0200, Ivan Shmakov wrote:
>> unruh writes:
>> On 2011-10-12, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> >> - read only system: more parts would be read only
>
> > ? Surely you can make whatever you want read only now.
>
> With all the sort of software continuo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/12/2011 11:28 AM, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> This would be the practical effect, but let's try to not get away
> too much from UNIX...
moving / to /usr will take a lot of time in the linux ecosystem. since i
prefere doing such a thing only once in a
> Tollef Fog Heen writes:
>> The problem, AIUI, is that we start udev(7) before /usr is mounted.
>> As udev is prone to spawn all the sorts of software in turn, we're
>> either going to move more and more from /usr to /, /or/ to invent
>> more kluges so that udev scripts would actually wa
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 12:50:32PM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Adam Borowski (12/10/2011):
> > On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 06:56:25AM +, Philipp Kern wrote:
> > > On 2011-10-11, Ognyan Kulev wrote:
> > > >
> > > > /usr/include -> /usr/share/include
> > >
> > > Obviously broken. Includes can
]] Ivan Shmakov
| The problem, AIUI, is that we start udev(7) before /usr is
| mounted. As udev is prone to spawn all the sorts of software in
| turn, we're either going to move more and more from /usr to /,
| /or/ to invent more kluges so that udev scripts would actually
Adam Borowski (12/10/2011):
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 06:56:25AM +, Philipp Kern wrote:
> > On 2011-10-11, Ognyan Kulev wrote:
> > >
> > > /usr/include -> /usr/share/include
> >
> > Obviously broken. Includes can (and will be) architecture-specific.
>
> With multiarch, they are shareable.
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Antonio Ospite
Dear Maintainer,
* Package name: kinect-audio-setup
Version : 0.1
Upstream Author : Drew Fisher , Antonio Ospite
* URL : http://git.ao2.it/kinect-audio-setup.git
* License : BSD-2-Clause, WTFPL
Program
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 06:56:25AM +, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On 2011-10-11, Ognyan Kulev wrote:
> > На 11.10.2011 17:32, Marco d'Itri написа:
> >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/UsrMove
> >> This reminds me a bit of the /usr/doc/ => /usr/share/doc/ transition.
> > This changes semanti
On Oct 12, Daniel Baumann wrote:
> On 10/11/2011 04:32 PM, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > I am still not 100% persuaded that this would be easy to do, but at
> > least I think that it has more merit than the old "move all to /"...
> i'd rather see a /$foo and /usr/$foo merger to /system/$foo, so we can
> Daniel Baumann writes:
> On 10/11/2011 04:32 PM, Marco d'Itri wrote:
>> I am still not 100% persuaded that this would be easy to do, but at
>> least I think that it has more merit than the old "move all to /"...
> i'd rather see a /$foo and /usr/$foo merger to /system/$foo, so we
>
> Reinhard Tartler writes:
> On Mi, Okt 12, 2011 at 06:09:00 (CEST), Ivan Shmakov wrote:
[…]
> AFAIUI Harald (the fedora maintainer for their initramfs tool
> dracut), he dislikes having a separate set of tools in /usr and the
> initramfs, i.e., he strongly favors putting glibc, bash,
On 10/11/2011 04:32 PM, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> I am still not 100% persuaded that this would be easy to do, but at
> least I think that it has more merit than the old "move all to /"...
i'd rather see a /$foo and /usr/$foo merger to /system/$foo, so we can
have the trichotomy /system, /local and /h
> Philipp Kern writes:
> On 2011-10-11, Ognyan Kulev wrote:
> На 11.10.2011 17:32, Marco d'Itri написа:
[…]
>> /usr/src -> /usr/share/src
> Probably depends if you want to support compile outputs there. I
> guess some people compile their kernels there.
Which isn't a g
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 11:06:35AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 4:29 AM, Adrien wrote:
>
> > The packaging is now ready and we are looking for a sponsor to include it in
> > the qt-kde repository (http://qt-kde.debian.net/). So experienced users can
> > test it before the offi
On 2011-10-11, Ognyan Kulev wrote:
> На 11.10.2011 17:32, Marco d'Itri написа:
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/UsrMove
>> This reminds me a bit of the /usr/doc/ => /usr/share/doc/ transition.
> This changes semantics of /usr directory. /usr becomes all shareable
> files, /usr/share -
38 matches
Mail list logo
