On 04/11/2012 06:12 AM, Chris Knadle wrote:
> - if the init script left behind was part of a Debian package, deleting the
> init script means removing part of the configuration from the Debian pacakge,
> yet not purging the package it belongs to. This feels like something that
> would volate D
Roger Leigh writes:
> Hi,
>
> When dependency-based booting was introduced, it was initially
> entirely optional. We later made it the default, and encouraged
> users to switch to dependency-based boot on upgrade. So today,
> pretty much everyone will be using dependency-based boot with
> there
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 12:13:09PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Roger Leigh writes:
> As a side note I have a use case at work where static order seems to be
> needed. We build boot images for network boot of clusters. During boot
> additional files can be copied from NFS into the system i
On 2012-04-11 12:13 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> 2) Static order is currently supported and supporting it for wheezy
> doesn't incurr horrible amounts of work.
I beg to disagree, it is already unsupportable because the only way to
test it is to set up a lenny system, create some local ini
Find aa paartner aand get laaid t0night!x
https://docs.google.com/document/d/159mFk7o0zdB7WGup7dpCC_cYqDIuQbKTe7cF4X96iQw/edit
-
To stop rexceiving mesxsages from us pleasxe send an email to oeqz0215 [at]
gmail [dot] com with the worxd REMOVE in the suxbject line.
--
To UNSUBSC
On Wednesday, April 11, 2012 05:14:34, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 04/11/2012 06:12 AM, Chris Knadle wrote:
> > - if the init script left behind was part of a Debian package, deleting
> > the init script means removing part of the configuration from the Debian
> > pacakge, yet not purging the packa
[Sven Joachim]
> I beg to disagree, it is already unsupportable because the only way
> to test it is to set up a lenny system, create some local init
> script without LSB headers to prevent migration to dependency based
> boot, and then upgrade all the way to squeeze and wheezy.
You can also inst
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 07:03:09AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
>Package: general
>Severity: serious
>Tags: wheezy, sid
>
>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 kin
Package: wnpp
Owner: gregor herrmann
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,debian-p...@lists.debian.org
* Package name: libcgi-compile-perl
Version : 0.15
Upstream Author : Tatsuhiko Miyagawa
* URL : http://search.cpan.org/dist/CGI-Compile/
*
On Wed, 11 Apr 2012, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Apr 2012, Brian May wrote:
> > On 10 April 2012 16:06, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> > >> dpkg -l | awk '/^rc/ {print $2}' | xargs --no-run-if-empty dpkg --purge
> > >>
> > > That's a pretty dangerous line. People (sometimes) don't purge packag
tag 621020 +moreinfo
thanks
Regarding #621020
"/etc/init.d/mysql uses "set -e" for most of the script, but that is not
compatible with the LSB library /lib/lsb/init-functions. This
particularly causes problems whenever log_end_msg is called with a
nonzero argument, as log_end_msg will return th
Hi,
On Wed, 11 Apr 2012, Nicholas Bamber wrote:
> Hmm... This contradicts section 6.1 of the Debian policy.
>
> "The package management system looks at the exit status from these
> scripts. It is important that they exit with a non-zero status if
Here "these scripts" refer to "package maintainer
Ah thanks. YEs that rings a bell now.
On 11/04/12 21:04, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 11 Apr 2012, Nicholas Bamber wrote:
Hmm... This contradicts section 6.1 of the Debian policy.
"The package management system looks at the exit status from these
scripts. It is important that they exit
13 matches
Mail list logo
