Thomas Goirand writes:
> On 03/17/2012 06:11 AM, Romain Beauxis wrote:
>> 2012/3/11 Mike Hommey
>>
>>> The problem is: decss is illegal in very much more than just the US.
>>> This is a very different situation.
>>>
>> Orly? Do you know of any law and/or court case backing this assertion
On Fri, 16 Mar 2012 23:32:25 -0700, Allison Randal wrote:
...
> In this case, the options I see being weighed are whether to support
> sysvinit, upstart, or systemd, or some combination.
...
> So, the contributor agreement is a factor, but not the only factor (or
> even the primary factor).
There
On 03/17/2012 08:10 AM, Fernando Lemos wrote:
> Right now, creating a init script means copying an ugly 159-line
> skeleton and carefully editing it, hoping not to break anything while
> at it. Even if we can't have a single generator for multiple init
> systems, having something declarative to bui
On 03/17/2012 02:45 AM, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Lars Wirzenius writes:
>
>
>> I don't know what should happen next, except someone should take
>> leadership on this issue and find a rough consensus on what we as a
>> project want to do. The usual way of that to happen is for someone to
>> grab a
Allison Randal writes:
> On 03/16/2012 06:50 PM, Ben Finney wrote:
> Allison Randal writes:
> > > Hypothetically, if this went away,
> > > would it have a substantial impact on the decision?
> > Which decision in particular, and by who?
>
> Anthropologically speaking, folkmoot is […] but I'd say
On Sat, 17 Mar 2012 18:23:57 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 03/17/2012 08:10 AM, Fernando Lemos wrote:
> > Right now, creating a init script means copying an ugly 159-line
> > skeleton and carefully editing it, hoping not to break anything while
> > at it. Even if we can't have a single generat
Matthias Klose wrote:
> While we strive to get multiarch ready for squeeze, there is
> currently nothing to point to what the multiarch tuples actually
> mean, neither on the Debian side nor on some kind of standards side
> like the FHS or LSB. This has to be documented on the Debian side,
> and
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 06:23:57PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> Having a shell script library for that would make it more declarative,
> and less imperative, so we wouldn't have to write all of the script.
>
> For me, that'd be quite easy enough. I'm proposing myself to write
> such library if n
Le samedi 17 mars 2012 à 09:16 +, Philip Hands a écrit :
> There is a big difference between supporting the use of something as an
> alternative, and choosing it as a default -- I'd expect that we're able
> to support the use of all of these to a greater or lesser extent, but
> the contributor
Le vendredi 16 mars 2012 à 18:39 +0100, Marco d'Itri a écrit :
> On Mar 16, Vincent Danjean wrote:
>
> > * We could try to define a file format that allow a conversion (by a
> > separate specific tool or at runtime) to various init systems.
> > This would avoid to be blocked by the syntax/fe
On Mar 17, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > I doubt that this is possible except for the most trivial cases (which
> > are not interesting), because the three init systems do not have the
> > same features and they have different semantics.
> It is for trivial cases (>90% of init scripts) that this
On Mar 16, Alexander Wirt wrote:
> > What attack? Toys are not evil, I like toys.
> > But an OS developed by 10 people for maybe 100 people is still a toy.
> Yeah, like Linux too not so long ago. With people like you we would still
> have to use Windows.
Predicting the future has always been a tr
On 03/17/2012 10:13 PM, Jon Dowland wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 06:23:57PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>
>> Having a shell script library for that would make it more declarative,
>> and less imperative, so we wouldn't have to write all of the script.
>>
>> For me, that'd be quite easy enou
Thomas Goirand writes:
> Currently, if you make a debian/$package.upstart using dh 8 sequencer,
> then $package will depend on upstart. Then if you install $package, it
> will pull upstart, and remove sysvinit, which makes your system unusable
> (since most package don't have upstart support).
C
m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) writes:
> On Mar 17, Josselin Mouette wrote:
>> It is for trivial cases (>90% of init scripts) that this is the most
>> interesting. Non-trivial cases could still be handled by shipping a
>> manually written init script together.
> But for the trivial cases we can ju
On 03/17/2012 08:40 PM, Philip Hands wrote:
> I'm happy to help with that ...
Cool! Let's do it together then.
> although, I doubt we're the first people
> to think of something like this, and it would be a shame to ignore an
> existing solution.
>
> RedHat have some functions for use in init scr
On 03/16/2012 06:14 PM, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> * We could require every package that provides a service that needs to be
> started by init to support both sysvinit and upstart or systemd. However,
> given the realities of Debian development, this would probably mean
> that one of them would
Thomas Goirand writes:
> taked with a friend working for redhat, and he told me how much
> he hates it. He told me that if *anything* goes wrong in the boot
> process, then basically, you're stuck, because the next thing will
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_debug_Systemd_problems
seems to c
Thomas Goirand writes:
> I'd like people to think twice before opt-in for systemd. I just taked
> with a friend working for redhat, and he told me how much he hates
> it. He told me that if *anything* goes wrong in the boot process, then
> basically, you're stuck, because the next thing will be w
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 12:53:37AM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> I know almost nothing about systemd
>
> I'd like people to think twice before opt-in for systemd. I just
> taked with a friend working for redhat, and he told me how much
> he hates it. He told me that if *anything* goes wrong in th
On 03/17/2012 05:20 AM, Ben Finney wrote:
>
> I don't know what you're asking, which is why I asked you for
> clarification of what you mean.
>
> You asked “if this [requirement for the Canonical contributor agreement
> before accepting contributions in ‘upstart’] went away, would it have a
> sub
On 03/18/2012 01:43 AM, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> I managed a to spark a new empty discussion, which repeats the old
> arguments, but produces no code. And now there's a challenge
> to start a new round of naked FUD wrestling. This was quite the
> opposite of what I tried to do. Sorry.
>
Sorry, t
On 17.03.2012 17:48, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 03/17/2012 08:40 PM, Philip Hands wrote:
>> I'm happy to help with that ...
>
> Cool! Let's do it together then.
>
>> although, I doubt we're the first people
>> to think of something like this, and it would be a shame to ignore an
>> existing solut
On Mar 17, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> Have you noticed that both myself and Phil Hands took the
> decision to write a sysv init lib, to avoid code duplication?
> That alone is a good thing, no?
It's not, because the goal should be to deprecate init scripts like
other distributions did.
--
ciao,
M
On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 00:48:01 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 03/17/2012 08:40 PM, Philip Hands wrote:
...
> > so the thing that actually gets run is the /etc/rc.common, which sources
> > the init.d script at its end, so it is possible to override any part of
> > the common script by including fu
Thomas Goirand writes:
> On 03/18/2012 01:43 AM, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
>> I managed a to spark a new empty discussion, which repeats the old
>> arguments, but produces no code. And now there's a challenge
>> to start a new round of naked FUD wrestling. This was quite the
>> opposite of what I tri
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Iustin Pop
* Package name: shelltestrunner
Version : 1.2.1
Upstream Author : Simon Michael
* URL : http://joyful.com/shelltestrunner
* License : GPLv3
Programming Lang: Haskell
Description : test command-line pro
On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 00:48:01 +0800
Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 03/17/2012 08:40 PM, Philip Hands wrote:
> > I'm happy to help with that ...
>
> Cool! Let's do it together then.
>
> > although, I doubt we're the first people
> > to think of something like this, and it would be a shame to ignore
>
On Sat, 17 Mar 2012 18:23:57 +0800
Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 03/17/2012 08:10 AM, Fernando Lemos wrote:
> > Right now, creating a init script means copying an ugly 159-line
> > skeleton and carefully editing it, hoping not to break anything
> > while at it. Even if we can't have a single generat
2012/3/17 Arto Jantunen :
> Thomas Goirand writes:
>
>> On 03/17/2012 06:11 AM, Romain Beauxis wrote:
>>> 2012/3/11 Mike Hommey
>>>
The problem is: decss is illegal in very much more than just the US.
This is a very different situation.
>>> Orly? Do you know of any law and/or court
On Sun, 2012-03-11 at 10:02 +0100, Eric Valette wrote:
> Again, I can understand the reasons, but an average user expects to be
> able to read dvd or blue-ray or to get a decent multimedia player.
>
> Other distribution do have ways to provide it to their users.
Which distro provides Blu-Ray pla
On Sun, 2012-03-11 at 00:56 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Because it's not illegal in just Kbanga.
> The content providers are doing
> their best to make it illegal everywhere, and would potentially harass
> Debian as an organization in rather more than just one country if we
> distribute decss.
Christoph Anton Mitterer writes:
> In principle you're right,.. but we start to enter a path of doom if we
> censor ourself like this...
> You'll probably be able to find thousands of places in any distro, where
> some patent troll or content mafia organisations pretend to have
> "rights" on.
H
On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 08:13:10PM +0100, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
> On SELinux enabled system, login applications need to call selinux pam
> module during the opening of the session to correctly set the user's
> security context. In Debian the "login" service is already doing this,
> but desktop
On Saturday, March 17, 2012 21:53:18, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Christoph Anton Mitterer writes:
> > In principle you're right,.. but we start to enter a path of doom if we
> > censor ourself like this...
> >
> > You'll probably be able to find thousands of places in any distro, where
> > some patent
Chris Knadle writes:
> On Saturday, March 17, 2012 21:53:18, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Hence the Debian patent policy.
>> We can't just ignore things like this, nor is it responsible use of
>> project resources to openly flaunt disobedience to laws, however
>> ill-conceived. But neither is it Debi
36 matches
Mail list logo
