On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 01:08:57AM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Am 25.07.2014 19:23, schrieb Steve Langasek:
> > systemd-shim 6-4 has now been uploaded to unstable with a dependency on
> > cgmanager, implementing the new post-v205 interfaces. libpam-systemd now
> > needs to be updated to depend a
El lun, 28 de jul 2014 a las 8:21 , Michael Biebl
escribió:
Am 28.07.2014 16:53, schrieb Michael Biebl:
--8<---
[Unit]
Description=Unlock EncFS
DefaultDependencies=no
After=local-fs.target
Before=display-manager.service getty@tty1.service
[Service]
Type=oneshot
RemainAft
Am 28.07.2014 16:53, schrieb Michael Biebl:
> --8<---
> [Unit]
> Description=Unlock EncFS
> DefaultDependencies=no
> After=local-fs.target
> Before=display-manager.service getty@tty1.service
>
> [Service]
> Type=oneshot
> RemainAfterExit=true
> Environment=RootDir=/home/.encfs/crypt
>
Hi,
Am 28.07.2014 01:54, schrieb Christian Hofstaedtler:
> * Michael Biebl [140727 23:09]:
>> Am 22.07.2014 23:54, schrieb Julian Gilbey:
>>> For me, this is a killer, as I still do not know how to solve the
>>> problem I asked a while back on debian-user
>>> (https://lists.debian.org/debian-user
Le Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 10:32:00AM +, Thorsten Glaser a écrit :
>
> There are lots of duckduckgo results for "systemd
> screen session" where people describe systemd killing their
> GNU screen sessions, changing config files to avoid it,
> only for the next systemd upgrade to kill their GNU sc
Hi,
On 07/28/2014 12:32, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Vincent Lefevre wrote:
>> Screen sessions, SSH sessions and computation processes running in
>> background are lost after a reboot, not after a relogin.
>
> AIUI this is not true for systemd: once the "session" is
> terminated, all background proc
Vincent Lefevre wrote:
>Screen sessions, SSH sessions and computation processes running in
>background are lost after a reboot, not after a relogin.
AIUI this is not true for systemd: once the "session" is
terminated, all background processes run in it are killed
too. There are lots of duckduckgo
* Michael Biebl [140727 23:09]:
> Am 22.07.2014 23:54, schrieb Julian Gilbey:
> > For me, this is a killer, as I still do not know how to solve the
> > problem I asked a while back on debian-user
> > (https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2014/04/msg01286.html): in
> > summary, I need to unlock an
Am 22.07.2014 23:54, schrieb Julian Gilbey:
> For me, this is a killer, as I still do not know how to solve the
> problem I asked a while back on debian-user
> (https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2014/04/msg01286.html): in
> summary, I need to unlock an encrypted filesystem during boot time by
>
On Jul 26, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Not mentioned there is another problem, namely that LSB mandates
> particular exit codes for particular conditions in init scripts, and set
> -e will not produce the correct exit codes.
What a great argument in favour of systemd... :-)
--
ciao,
Marco
signature
Le mercredi 23 juillet 2014 à 16:12 -0700, Russ Allbery a écrit :
> Someone with more detailed desktop knowledge should read this over and
> correct it as necessary. This is just my understanding of what's going
> on, and I don't work with the software in question and could be wrong in
> some det
❦ 25 juillet 2014 16:19 -0700, Russ Allbery :
>> I thought that start-stop-daemon (and status_of_proc) returned the
>> correct codes, and whatever it returns you can relay / let the shell
>> catch? The script is here
>> (https://github.com/cgmanager/cgmanager/pull/14/files), if you wanted to
>>
Quoting Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org):
> Cameron Norman writes:
>
> > Oh this is easy. The init script calls s-s-d and does not check the return
> > code (so always exits 0). I am just going to use set -e in the init
> > script, only a couple tweaks are needed.
>
> Please don't use set -e in in
On 2014-07-25 23:04:55 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Am 25.07.2014 22:43, schrieb Vincent Lefevre:
> > On 2014-07-25 22:18:23 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> >> And we already concluded that you need to logout anyway, even with
> >> systemd-shim. A reboot and relogin isn't that much different from a
Cameron Norman writes:
> I thought that start-stop-daemon (and status_of_proc) returned the
> correct codes, and whatever it returns you can relay / let the shell
> catch? The script is here
> (https://github.com/cgmanager/cgmanager/pull/14/files), if you wanted to
> take a look.
It does not, at
Am 25.07.2014 19:23, schrieb Steve Langasek:
> systemd-shim 6-4 has now been uploaded to unstable with a dependency on
> cgmanager, implementing the new post-v205 interfaces. libpam-systemd now
> needs to be updated to depend again on systemd-shim (>= 6-4) | systemd-sysv.
>
> Michael Biebl has sa
El Fri, 25 de Jul 2014 a las 3:42 PM, Russ Allbery
escribió:
Cameron Norman writes:
Oh this is easy. The init script calls s-s-d and does not check the
return
code (so always exits 0). I am just going to use set -e in the init
script, only a couple tweaks are needed.
Please don't use se
Steve Langasek writes:
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 11:44:43PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
>> Ah perfect. Seems this just hasn't hit the archive yet when I installed
>> cgmanager.
>> Steve, could you please bump the depends on cgmanager in systemd-shim
>> accordingly to ensure a working cgmanager i
Cameron Norman writes:
> Oh this is easy. The init script calls s-s-d and does not check the return
> code (so always exits 0). I am just going to use set -e in the init
> script, only a couple tweaks are needed.
Please don't use set -e in init scripts. See Policy 9.3.2:
Be careful of usin
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 11:44:43PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Ah perfect. Seems this just hasn't hit the archive yet when I installed
> cgmanager.
> Steve, could you please bump the depends on cgmanager in systemd-shim
> accordingly to ensure a working cgmanager is installed?
No, I'm not going
El Fri, 25 de Jul 2014 a las 2:50 PM, Steve Langasek
escribió:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 11:10:41PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
Am 25.07.2014 19:23, schrieb Steve Langasek:
> systemd-shim 6-4 has now been uploaded to unstable with a
dependency on
> cgmanager, implementing the new post-v205 in
Quoting Michael Biebl (bi...@debian.org):
> Hi Serge!
>
> Am 25.07.2014 23:35, schrieb Serge Hallyn:
> > Quoting Michael Biebl (bi...@debian.org):
> >> Am 25.07.2014 19:23, schrieb Steve Langasek:
> >>> systemd-shim 6-4 has now been uploaded to unstable with a dependency on
> >>> cgmanager, implem
Quoting Michael Biebl (bi...@debian.org):
>
> Am 25.07.2014 23:35, schrieb Serge Hallyn:
> > Quoting Michael Biebl (bi...@debian.org):
> >>
> >> The init script fails with
> >>
> >> # service cgmanager start
> >> [] Starting cgroup management daemon: cgmanagercgmanager: Failed
> >> mounting me
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 11:10:41PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Am 25.07.2014 19:23, schrieb Steve Langasek:
> > systemd-shim 6-4 has now been uploaded to unstable with a dependency on
> > cgmanager, implementing the new post-v205 interfaces.
> I just installed systemd-shim 6-4 and cgmanager 0.2
Am 25.07.2014 23:35, schrieb Serge Hallyn:
> Quoting Michael Biebl (bi...@debian.org):
>>
>> The init script fails with
>>
>> # service cgmanager start
>> [] Starting cgroup management daemon: cgmanagercgmanager: Failed
>> mounting memory onto /run/cgmanager/fs/memory: No such file or director
Hi Serge!
Am 25.07.2014 23:35, schrieb Serge Hallyn:
> Quoting Michael Biebl (bi...@debian.org):
>> Am 25.07.2014 19:23, schrieb Steve Langasek:
>>> systemd-shim 6-4 has now been uploaded to unstable with a dependency on
>>> cgmanager, implementing the new post-v205 interfaces.
>>
>> I just insta
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 10:46:45PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Am 25.07.2014 20:44, schrieb Steve Langasek:
> > Correct. But it's well-established that, when you upgrade your system,
> > things may be broken in a currently logged-in desktop session until you
> > log out and log back in.
> The r
Quoting Michael Biebl (bi...@debian.org):
> Am 25.07.2014 19:23, schrieb Steve Langasek:
> > systemd-shim 6-4 has now been uploaded to unstable with a dependency on
> > cgmanager, implementing the new post-v205 interfaces.
>
> I just installed systemd-shim 6-4 and cgmanager 0.28-1.
> Unfortunatel
On Fri, 2014-07-25 at 23:10 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> I just installed systemd-shim 6-4 and cgmanager 0.28-1.
> Unfortunately the cgmanager package seems to be not quite ready yet.
>
> The init script fails with
>
> # service cgmanager start
> [] Starting cgroup management daemon: cgmanag
Am 25.07.2014 19:23, schrieb Steve Langasek:
> systemd-shim 6-4 has now been uploaded to unstable with a dependency on
> cgmanager, implementing the new post-v205 interfaces.
I just installed systemd-shim 6-4 and cgmanager 0.28-1.
Unfortunately the cgmanager package seems to be not quite ready ye
Am 25.07.2014 22:43, schrieb Vincent Lefevre:
> On 2014-07-25 22:18:23 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
>> And we already concluded that you need to logout anyway, even with
>> systemd-shim. A reboot and relogin isn't that much different from a
>> users POV.
>
> Screen sessions, SSH sessions and comput
Am 25.07.2014 20:44, schrieb Steve Langasek:
> Correct. But it's well-established that, when you upgrade your system,
> things may be broken in a currently logged-in desktop session until you
> log out and log back in.
The release notes actually mention that the system should *not* be
upgraded fr
On 2014-07-25 22:18:23 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> And we already concluded that you need to logout anyway, even with
> systemd-shim. A reboot and relogin isn't that much different from a
> users POV.
Screen sessions, SSH sessions and computation processes running in
background are lost after a
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 10:00:07PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Am 25.07.2014 21:20, schrieb Steve Langasek:
> > I can't imagine how anyone can simultaneously hold the view that Debian
> > should use systemd for improved integration with end-user-targeted desktop
> > environments, and believe that
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 12:50:53PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Steve Langasek writes:
> > I can't imagine how anyone can simultaneously hold the view that Debian
> > should use systemd for improved integration with end-user-targeted
> > desktop environments, and believe that Debian should leave
Am 25.07.2014 22:00, schrieb Michael Biebl:
> Am 25.07.2014 21:20, schrieb Steve Langasek:
>> I can't imagine how anyone can simultaneously hold the view that Debian
>> should use systemd for improved integration with end-user-targeted desktop
>> environments, and believe that Debian should leave t
Am 25.07.2014 21:20, schrieb Steve Langasek:
> I can't imagine how anyone can simultaneously hold the view that Debian
> should use systemd for improved integration with end-user-targeted desktop
> environments, and believe that Debian should leave these end users grubbing
> around on the console t
Steve Langasek writes:
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 11:42:16AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> I continue to be baffled by people's apparent belief that this
>> happening during a major upgrade is some sort of regression. Having
>> those buttons not work after a major component upgrade, until the X
>
Steve Langasek writes:
> The difference here is that, without systemd-shim, logging out and
> logging back in still does not give the user a working session, you
> would have to completely reboot instead. I think this is an important
> difference in the quality of the upgrade experience.
Ah, *t
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 11:42:16AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Steve Langasek writes:
> > For the specific case of a change that makes basic desktop functions
> > unusable between upgrade and reboot (including the "reboot" button
> > itself), the right answer is "until it's ready, and if you wan
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 08:19:14PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Am 25.07.2014 19:23, schrieb Steve Langasek:
> > On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 06:56:06PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> >> ]] Martin Steigerwald
> >>> Sure I can go through setting up chroot for that, yet I really think if
> >>> my
>
Steve Langasek writes:
> For the specific case of a change that makes basic desktop functions
> unusable between upgrade and reboot (including the "reboot" button
> itself), the right answer is "until it's ready, and if you want it
> sooner then help."
I continue to be baffled by people's appare
Am 25.07.2014 19:23, schrieb Steve Langasek:
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 06:56:06PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
>> ]] Martin Steigerwald
>
>>> Sure I can go through setting up chroot for that, yet I really think if my
>>> work requires changes in other packages and the recent systemd changes do
Am Freitag, 25. Juli 2014, 10:23:02 schrieb Steve Langasek:
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 06:56:06PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > ]] Martin Steigerwald
> >
> > > Sure I can go through setting up chroot for that, yet I really think if
> > > my
> > > work requires changes in other packages and the
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 06:56:06PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> ]] Martin Steigerwald
> > Sure I can go through setting up chroot for that, yet I really think if my
> > work requires changes in other packages and the recent systemd changes do
> > require this kind of work, I *help* with thes
]] Martin Steigerwald
> Sure I can go through setting up chroot for that, yet I really think if my
> work requires changes in other packages and the recent systemd changes do
> require this kind of work, I *help* with these changes, instead of uploading
> my changes to unstable *before* the ot
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 04:00:31PM -0007, Cameron Norman wrote:
> El Fri, 25 de Jul 2014 a las 8:47 AM, Josh Triplett
> escribió:
> >Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> >> Sure I can go through setting up chroot for that, yet I really
> >>think if my
> >> work requires changes in other packages and the re
El Fri, 25 de Jul 2014 a las 8:47 AM, Josh Triplett
escribió:
Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Sure I can go through setting up chroot for that, yet I really
think if my
work requires changes in other packages and the recent systemd
changes do require this kind of work, I *help* with these changes,
Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Sure I can go through setting up chroot for that, yet I really think if my
> work requires changes in other packages and the recent systemd changes do
> require this kind of work, I *help* with these changes, instead of uploading
> my changes to unstable *before* the oth
❦ 25 juillet 2014 14:22 +0200, Martin Steigerwald :
> Re: Bug#755989: cfdisk: german help page strangely formatted
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=755989#15
>
> (In addition to NFS mounts broken with systemd currently.)
>
>
> Sure I can go through setting up chroot for that,
Am Dienstag, 22. Juli 2014, 22:54:55 schrieb Julian Gilbey:
> For me, this is a killer, as I still do not know how to solve the
> problem I asked a while back on debian-user
> (https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2014/04/msg01286.html): in
> summary, I need to unlock an encrypted filesystem during
On 07/23/2014 04:42 PM, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> On 2014-07-23, Sune Vuorela wrote:
>> On 2014-07-23, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> and you doesn't again say "Let's have
>> someone run over specific developers with a bus", then the CoC is good.
>
> Dear Thomas
>
> I sincerely apologize for the above li
Vincent Lefevre writes:
> On 2014-07-22 19:54:10 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> logind is also not mandatory in Debian now. It's just required,
>> upstream, by all the major desktop environments.
> Not just by all the major desktop environments. It is also needed by
> hplip via dependencies[*],
On 2014-07-22 19:54:10 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> logind is also not mandatory in Debian now. It's just required, upstream,
> by all the major desktop environments.
Not just by all the major desktop environments. It is also needed
by hplip via dependencies[*], which is quite surprising for a
"H
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 10:54:55PM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> I just tried updating testing on my system. I currently use
> sysvinit-core (reasons below), but aptitude is telling me that I
> should remove this in favour of systemd-sysv. Hmm, why is that?
> Well, because the new version of libp
Juliusz Chroboczek writes:
>> However, you're doing this during boot, so there *are* no active users,
>> since the system hasn't come up far enough to let anyone log in yet. So
>> it makes sense that you don't get a prompt.
> Does that mean that the new pid 1 expects users to be logged in befor
Hi,
Juliusz Chroboczek:
> I don't think the comparison between texlive and systemd is quite fair.
Any comparison will have its "apples vs. potatoes" aspects.
That doesn't invalidate the comparable parts.
> I still believe that this is just bad coordination and bad communi-
> cation on the part o
> I'm sure the texlive maintainers feel perfectly justified in breaking
> existing setups and causing packages to FTBFS by doing this.
I don't think the comparison between texlive and systemd is quite fair.
Texlive updates don't break users' systems, they just make some packages
temporarily un-up
> However, you're doing this during boot, so there *are* no active users,
> since the system hasn't come up far enough to let anyone log in yet. So
> it makes sense that you don't get a prompt.
Does that mean that the new pid 1 expects users to be logged in before it
starts the system?
-- Julius
Hi Norbert,
Please remember these arguments you have been making next time you make what
you believe are perfectly justified changes to the texlive packaging by
(once again) introducing new and incompatible versions of sty files or
moving files between packages.
I'm sure the texlive maintainer
Cameron Norman wrote:
>I noticed that not doing the libraries cause apt to try to upgrade them
>on dist-upgrade and do some weird operations like try to remove my
>current init system and install systemd-sysv or remove all of systemd,
>as well as NM and udisks and a lot of other packages.
FWIW, t
On 2014-07-23, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> On 2014-07-23, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> and you doesn't again say "Let's have
> someone run over specific developers with a bus", then the CoC is good.
Dear Thomas
I sincerely apologize for the above line. Somehow my internal memory
mixed up one T... G... wit
On 2014-07-23, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> If the CoC makes it impossible for Norbert to express himself in the way
> he just did, then the CoC is bad and should be repelled.
If the CoC helps ensure that Norbert doesn't again say "I don't give a
shit about other people's work" - and you doesn't again
Hi,
Thomas Goirand:
> If the CoC makes it impossible for Norbert to express himself in the way
> he just did, then the CoC is bad and should be repelled.
>
*repealed.
I disagree. Insinuating that the systemd proponents' goal is
>> "One init to rule them all, to bind them, and throw them into dar
On 07/23/2014 07:46 AM, Ben Finney wrote:
> Writing a disclaimer doesn't exempt you from the Code of conduct in
> Debian forums. Please don't violate it again.
If the CoC makes it impossible for Norbert to express himself in the way
he just did, then the CoC is bad and should be repelled.
I'm get
Adam Borowski writes:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 03:58:32AM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
>> Well, the subject (and also the body) conveyed the wrong message, that
>> systemd is mandatory in Debian now. Which - as you also said - is
>> wrong, at least for two reasons: a.) it's logind, not systemd an
El Tue, 22 de Jul 2014 a las 4:39 PM, Vincent Lefevre
escribió:
On 2014-07-23 01:24:53 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
On 2014-07-22 22:54:55 +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> I just tried updating testing on my system. I currently use
> sysvinit-core (reasons below), but aptitude is telling me t
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 03:58:32AM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
> Well, the subject (and also the body) conveyed the wrong message, that
> systemd
> is mandatory in Debian now. Which - as you also said - is wrong, at least for
> two reasons: a.) it's logind, not systemd and b.) only desktops are
Hi Steve,
thanks for the technical details, much appreciated.
On Mittwoch, 23. Juli 2014, Steve Langasek wrote:
> There was nothing in Julian's message which was a rant, so I don't think
> this response is called for.
Well, the subject (and also the body) conveyed the wrong message, that system
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 01:26:47AM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Dienstag, 22. Juli 2014, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > I just tried updating testing on my system. I currently use
> > sysvinit-core (reasons below), but aptitude is telling me that I
> > should remove this in favour of systemd-sysv.
On Wed, 2014-07-23 at 00:08 +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 12:51:16AM +0200, Svante Signell wrote:
> > Forward this to the debian CTTE, please!
>
> Thanks for the suggestion, Svante! I've just reread
> https://www.debian.org/devel/tech-ctte and it does not yet seem
> approp
Holger Levsen writes:
> On Dienstag, 22. Juli 2014, Julian Gilbey wrote:
>> For me, this is a killer, as I still do not know how to solve the
>> problem I asked a while back on debian-user
>> (https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2014/04/msg01286.html): in
>> summary, I need to unlock an encrypte
Norbert Preining writes:
> [ IMPORTANT - COC DISCLAIMER - IMPORTANT - PLEASE READ BEFORE
> CONTINUING ]
Writing a disclaimer doesn't exempt you from the Code of conduct in
Debian forums. Please don't violate it again.
--
\ “It's up to the masses to distribute [music] however they want |
Hi,
Julian Gilbey:
> I need to unlock an encrypted filesystem during boot time by
> asking for a password to feed into encfs. But I cannot figure out how
> to do this under systemd.
>
"encfs --extpass=systemd-ask-password" ?
--
-- Matthias Urlichs
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-re
On 2014-07-23 01:24:53 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2014-07-22 22:54:55 +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > I just tried updating testing on my system. I currently use
> > sysvinit-core (reasons below), but aptitude is telling me that I
> > should remove this in favour of systemd-sysv. Hmm, why
Le Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 12:08:04AM +0100, Julian Gilbey a écrit :
>
> Anyway, I would still love to know how to write a systemd script which
> pauses to accept input from the keyboard before continuing.
Hi Julian,
I suggest to ask this question on
pkg-systemd-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Hi,
(as this thread has already attracted two "interesting replies", I'll try
again to convey the message which has not been heard yet... I don't have high
hopes this thread won't become a flamefest, but I want to at least try to kill
the flames before they explode...)
(And if you know systemd
* Norbert Preining [140723 01:09]:
> [ IMPORTANT - COC DISCLAIMER - IMPORTANT - PLEASE READ BEFORE CONTINUING ]
> This email is the personal opinion of its author.
> As we are not allowed to criticize due to the newly installed
> Code of Conduct, you are required to pre- or postfix *every* senten
On 2014-07-22 22:54:55 +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> I just tried updating testing on my system. I currently use
> sysvinit-core (reasons below), but aptitude is telling me that I
> should remove this in favour of systemd-sysv. Hmm, why is that?
> Well, because the new version of libpam-systemd,
On Jul 22, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> So I would presume that for many or most Debian systems, systemd is
> now required, and no other /sbin/init providers will work. I'm
> unclear whether this was a deliberate policy decision or an unintended
> consequence of various package requirements.
It is a c
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 10:54:55PM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> I just tried updating testing on my system. I currently use
> sysvinit-core (reasons below), but aptitude is telling me that I
> should remove this in favour of systemd-sysv. Hmm, why is that?
> Well, because the new version of libp
* Julian Gilbey [140723 00:36]:
> For me, this is a killer, as I still do not know how to solve the
> problem I asked a while back on debian-user
> (https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2014/04/msg01286.html): in
> summary, I need to unlock an encrypted filesystem during boot time by
> asking for
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 12:51:16AM +0200, Svante Signell wrote:
> Forward this to the debian CTTE, please!
Thanks for the suggestion, Svante! I've just reread
https://www.debian.org/devel/tech-ctte and it does not yet seem
appropriate for the CTTE; there has not yet been any discussion with
the r
Forward this to the debian CTTE, please!
On Tue, 2014-07-22 at 22:54 +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> I just tried updating testing on my system. I currently use
> sysvinit-core (reasons below), but aptitude is telling me that I
> should remove this in favour of systemd-sysv. Hmm, why is that?
> We
Hi Julian,
long time no see!
[ IMPORTANT - COC DISCLAIMER - IMPORTANT - PLEASE READ BEFORE CONTINUING ]
This email is the personal opinion of its author.
As we are not allowed to criticize due to the newly installed
Code of Conduct, you are required to pre- or postfix *every* sentence
in the fol
I just tried updating testing on my system. I currently use
sysvinit-core (reasons below), but aptitude is telling me that I
should remove this in favour of systemd-sysv. Hmm, why is that?
Well, because the new version of libpam-systemd, 208-6, now depends on
systemd-sysv rather than systemd-sysv
86 matches
Mail list logo
