Hi Norbert,
Le mercredi, 22 mai 2013 02.20:22, Norbert Preining a écrit :
> On Di, 21 Mai 2013, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> > resolved *correctly*, with*out* introducing further security
> > issues and RC bugs.
>
> CAN YOU ALL STOP BITCHING AROUND ABOUT A NON-EXISTING ISSUE?!?!?!?!?!
Could you plea
On 2013-05-22 03:53, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> I think the first step would be get get pages like [0] to include
> version numbers of the packages tested (and preferably links to test
> logs).
This should be put into a wishlist bug against piuparts-master ...
If that were in place, then a patch
On 05/21/2013 10:53 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
- Neither systemd nor upstart are likely to be ported to kfreebsd soon,
as they both rely on many Linux-specific features and interfaces.
What about launchd? Wouldn't it be possible to port that to
Debian/kFreeBSD? It's designed to run in a BSD
Jonathan Wiltshire (Front Desk debian.org> writes:
> 3. Choose something appropriate from the links at the top right of the
>page. "Advocate for DD" is normally what you're after.
Can’t see that. (I tried a half dozen people just to confirm…)
bye,
//mirabilos
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
]] Dmitry Papchenkoff
> Additionally, there was requests for packaging for xssstatus, which is
> (by upstream) a part of suckless-tools too, but (as for other
> suckless-tools) have separate tarball. For example, if xsstools will
> be included in main package, then «tools for minimalist window
>
Hi Charles,
On 2013-05-22 06:05, Charles Plessy wrote:
> it is not fully related to your original question, but do you think that
> piuparts
> could support running Autopkgtests as well ?
Theoretically yes, but I haven't looked into DEP8 so far ... reading ...
Quoting from the autopkgtest speci
JFTR I already realized that and the new libgd2 upload has only
libtiff-dev as B-D and D.
Ondrej
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 8:07 AM, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Tue, 21 May 2013, Ondřej Surý wrote:
>> I did:
>>
>> $ grep tiff debian/control
>> B-D: libtiff5-alt-dev | libtiff-dev,
>
> Note that sbui
Norbert Preining logic.at> writes:
> > That to prevent is what package relationships are for!
>
> And? I did lots of test, but forgot that texlive-lang will be in
> the NEW queue, thus full upgrades will not work.
Please anyone else, correct me if I’m wrong, but I see the following
scenario:
T
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
>> > That to prevent is what package relationships are for!
>>
>> And? I did lots of test, but forgot that texlive-lang will be in
>> the NEW queue, thus full upgrades will not work.
>
> Please anyone else, correct me if I’m wrong, but I see
John Paul Adrian Glaubitz physik.fu-berlin.de> writes:
> On 05/21/2013 10:53 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> >
> > - Neither systemd nor upstart are likely to be ported to kfreebsd soon,
> >as they both rely on many Linux-specific features and interfaces.
And this is one more reason to continue
Hi,
On Wed, 22 May 2013, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Teχ consists of packages “foo” and “bar”. Norbert says he uploaded both
> but “bar” sits in the NEW queue, which is why the upgraded “foo” will
> not work.
>
> To me, this looks as if “foo” needs a versioned Depends on “bar” *and*
> “bar” possibly
Uoti Urpala wrote:
>A related point which I think is very important is the effect of
>Debian's decision on the larger community. Having Linux distributions
>permanently split in systemd and upstart camps would have major costs
>for the overall Linux community.
Actually, in the EU this is called a
On 22 May 2013 03:09, Guillem Jover wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Wed, 2013-05-22 at 01:47:42 +0100, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
>> On 22 May 2013 01:16, Michael Biebl wrote:
>> > Am 22.05.2013 02:00, schrieb Dmitrijs Ledkovs:
>> >> On 21 May 2013 21:53, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>> >>> On 20/05/13 at 18:19 +0200
On 2013-05-19 09:17:31 +0200, Jean-Christophe Dubacq wrote:
> Le 16/05/2013 08:43, Vincent Lefevre a écrit :
> > On 2013-05-15 20:27:09 +0200, Jean-Christophe Dubacq wrote:
> >> No. Your server comes unconfigured, you do configure it while the other
> >> is still working, and then you stop the serv
On 22 May 2013 03:32, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 01:16:29AM +0100, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
>> I have signed Canonical's and Python Software Foundation's contributor
>> agreements.
>> But I have no intention to assign copyright to FSF at the moment,
>> given it's past well do
Thorsten Glaser (22/05/2013):
> Jonathan Wiltshire (Front Desk debian.org> writes:
>
> > 3. Choose something appropriate from the links at the top right of the
> >page. "Advocate for DD" is normally what you're after.
>
> Can’t see that. (I tried a half dozen people just to confirm…)
Look
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Thibaut Paumard
Hi,
* Package name: yorick-gy
Version : 0.0.1
Upstream Author : Thibaut Paumard
* URL : https://github.com/paumard/yorick-gy
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: C, Yorick
Description : GObject intro
Cyril Brulebois debian.org> writes:
> Thorsten Glaser debian.org> (22/05/2013):
> > Jonathan Wiltshire (Front Desk debian.org> writes:
> >
> > > 3. Choose something appropriate from the links at the top right of the
> > >page. "Advocate for DD" is normally what you're after.
> >
> > Can’t
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 10:13:23AM +0100, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
> Some produce more open source software than others, and all of these
> will be ranked differently by each person differently, am I still yet
> to be screwed by Canonical's projects. Please correct me if I am
> wrong, but none of Ca
Hi,
On Mittwoch, 22. Mai 2013, Charles Plessy wrote:
> it is not fully related to your original question, but do you think that
> piuparts could support running Autopkgtests as well ?
I think we need another setup for this. Autopkgtests may destroy their
environment (and might need more than a c
Hello,
On Wed, 22 May 2013 00:11:20 +0400
Dmitry Papchenkoff wrote:
> 10 packages, excluding metapackage.
> This work was originally done for test-packages for mentors.debian.net
> as an effort to update and clean up suckless-tools.
> But after posting packages to mentors I was requested to make
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Ole Streicher
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,debian-scie...@lists.debian.org
* Package name: fitsverify
Version : 4.16
Upstream Author : NASA HEASARC
* URL :
http://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/software/ftools/fitsveri
On 22-05-13 13:06, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 10:13:23AM +0100, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
>> Some produce more open source software than others, and all of these
>> will be ranked differently by each person differently, am I still yet
>> to be screwed by Canonical's projects.
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Ondřej Surý"
* Package name: seafile
Version : 1.6.1
Upstream Author : Seafile Ltd.
* URL : http://seafile.com
* License : GPL3+
Programming Lang: C
Description : online file storage and collaboration server
S
Hi,
On Mittwoch, 22. Mai 2013, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
> FSF on the other hand:
[...]
You forgot their failure with this "gnu unix system" they were trying to
build! This also didnt take off - what a bunch of loosers!
cheers,
Holger
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally sign
* Holger Levsen , 2013-05-22, 13:26:
it is not fully related to your original question, but do you think
that piuparts could support running Autopkgtests as well ?
I think we need another setup for this. Autopkgtests may destroy their
environment (and might need more than a chroot) so they canno
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 01:35:54PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> No, that is *exactly* the point: yes, companies may have different
> objectives, but that doesn't mean they have to use different ways to get
> to those objectives.
>
> A contract is binding, whether one party to the contract is a
On Mittwoch, 22. Mai 2013, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> FWIW, most of the packages don't need anything more than a chroot.
Interesting, thanks.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
]] Lucas Nussbaum
> If I were you, I would be very worried about the risk that the decision
> will be taken not by looking at which one is the best, but by looking at
> which one is de-facto supported in Debian. In that area, systemd is very
> late, since:
> - AFAIK nobody has started the effort
Le mercredi 22 mai 2013 à 08:16 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
> - there are 300+ upstart job files ready to be imported from Ubuntu
When you compare the time it takes to write an upstart job file or a
systemd unit file, to the time it takes to proprely test it, I don’t
think this argument makes
On 22/05/13 at 08:22 +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> >> As Debian, we have two different problems:
> >> 1. We need to decide which init systems we want to support, and how.
> >> 2. We need to decide which init system should be the default.
>
> We will have a GR about that.
(I assume that by "abou
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Andrew Shadura wrote:
> I strongly disagree with this proposed split. The package is already
> too small for that. This split just adds unnecessary complexity and
> bloats the package manager lists, and also confuses users. Please don't.
+1.
Dmitry, Have you cont
On May 21, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> We don't need to select a single init system at this point, and it would
As the maintainer of a package which is strongly tied to the init
system, I disagree.
> Then, something I failed to find in the discussion was a discussion of
> how sysvinit / systemd / u
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 07:17:34AM +0400, Dmitry Papchenkoff wrote:
> Maybe there should not be a separate package for each tool, but at
> least st and dmenu should be packaged separately.
Why?
> Moreover, there IS a package named stterm in unstable which ships st
> separately (I've found it then
On 05/22/2013 04:50 AM, Uoti Urpala wrote:
Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
I went through the various init systems threads again during the last
few days. My understanding of the consensus so far is the following:
- Both systemd and upstart bring many useful features, and are a
clear improvement over
Hi!
On Wed, 2013-05-22 at 09:15:03 +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> On 05/21/2013 10:53 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> >- Neither systemd nor upstart are likely to be ported to kfreebsd soon,
> > as they both rely on many Linux-specific features and interfaces.
>
> What about launchd? Wou
On Wed, 2013-05-22 at 13:37 +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mittwoch, 22. Mai 2013, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
> > FSF on the other hand:
> [...]
>
> You forgot their failure with this "gnu unix system" they were trying to
> build! This also didnt take off - what a bunch of loosers!
It is
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Ole Streicher
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,debian-scie...@lists.debian.org
* Package name: cpl-plugin-sinf
Version : 2.3.3
Upstream Author : Andrea Modigliani
* URL : http://www.eso.org/sci/software/pipelines/sinf
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Ole Streicher
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,debian-scie...@lists.debian.org
* Package name: cpl-plugin-fors
Version : 4.9.23
Upstream Author : ESO
* URL : http://www.eso.org/sci/software/pipelines/fors
* License
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Ole Streicher
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,debian-scie...@lists.debian.org
* Package name: cpl-plugin-giraf
Version : 2.11
Upstream Author : Ralf Palsa
* URL : http://www.eso.org/sci/software/pipelines/giraf
* Lic
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Ole Streicher
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,debian-scie...@lists.debian.org
* Package name: cpl-plugin-amber
Version : 4.2.2
Upstream Author : Armin Gabasch
* URL : http://www.eso.org/sci/software/pipelines/amber
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Ole Streicher
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,debian-scie...@lists.debian.org
* Package name: cpl-plugin-hawki
Version : 1.8.12
Upstream Author : César Enrique García Dabó
* URL : http://www.eso.org/sci/software/pi
On 14:31 Wed 22 May , Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 07:17:34AM +0400, Dmitry Papchenkoff wrote:
> > Maybe there should not be a separate package for each tool, but at
> > least st and dmenu should be packaged separately.
>
> Why?
>
> > Moreover, there IS a package named st
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 09:15:03AM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> On 05/21/2013 10:53 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> >- Neither systemd nor upstart are likely to be ported to kfreebsd soon,
> > as they both rely on many Linux-specific features and interfaces.
> What about launchd? Would
On 22/05/13 at 14:45 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mercredi 22 mai 2013 à 08:16 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
> > - there are 300+ upstart job files ready to be imported from Ubuntu
>
> When you compare the time it takes to write an upstart job file or a
> systemd unit file, to the time i
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 03:39:00PM +0200, Bernd Schubert wrote:
> On 05/22/2013 04:50 AM, Uoti Urpala wrote:
> >Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> >>I went through the various init systems threads again during the last
> >>few days. My understanding of the consensus so far is the following:
> >>- Both system
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 02:45:54PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mercredi 22 mai 2013 à 08:16 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
> > - there are 300+ upstart job files ready to be imported from Ubuntu
> When you compare the time it takes to write an upstart job file or a
> systemd unit file, t
Am 22.05.2013 18:12 schrieb "Lucas Nussbaum" :
>
> On 22/05/13 at 14:45 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Le mercredi 22 mai 2013 à 08:16 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
> > > - there are 300+ upstart job files ready to be imported from Ubuntu
> >
> > When you compare the time it takes to write an
Le mercredi 22 mai 2013 à 09:41 -0700, Steve Langasek a écrit :
> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 02:45:54PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > When you compare the time it takes to write an upstart job file or a
> > systemd unit file, to the time it takes to proprely test it, I don’t
> > think this argum
Russ Allbery wrote:
> Jay Berkenbilt writes:
>> Ondřej Surý wrote:
>
>>> This results in:
>>>
>>> E: libgd-tools: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath usr/bin/annotate
>>> /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libtiff5-alt
>
>> Yes, I'm afraid that's unavoidable. This issue is mentioned in the
>> README.Debian f
* Josselin Mouette [2013-05-22 15:03]:
> Le mercredi 22 mai 2013 à 08:16 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
> > - there are 300+ upstart job files ready to be imported from Ubuntu
>
> When you compare the time it takes to write an upstart job file or a
> systemd unit file, to the time it takes to
On 05/22/2013 05:51 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 09:15:03AM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
What about launchd? Wouldn't it be possible to port that to
Debian/kFreeBSD? It's designed to run in a BSD userland, after all.
That doesn't seem like it would help at all
Le mercredi 22 mai 2013 à 19:50 +0200, Martin Wuertele a écrit :
> Actually it sounds like you propose to stop developing and take
> everything from Redhat, Lennart, Gnome because it's there and they say
> so.
Damn! I have been exposed.
I admit to everything. I am merely an artificial creature,
On 05/22/2013 06:41 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 02:45:54PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le mercredi 22 mai 2013 à 08:16 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
- there are 300+ upstart job files ready to be imported from Ubuntu
When you compare the time it takes to write an u
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 04:01:19PM +0200, Svante Signell wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-05-22 at 13:37 +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Mittwoch, 22. Mai 2013, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
> > > FSF on the other hand:
> > [...]
> >
> > You forgot their failure with this "gnu unix system" they wer
On 05/22/2013 07:50 PM, Martin Wuertele wrote:
Actually it sounds like you propose to stop developing and take
everything from Redhat, Lennart, Gnome because it's there and they say
so.
And another one. Why is it that almost anyone who isn't favor of
systemd is directly going off insulting thei
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Oleg Gashev
* Package name: libmodule-build-cleaninstall-perl
Version : 0.05
Upstream Author : Joel A. Berger
* URL : https://metacpan.org/release/Module-Build-CleanInstall/
* License : Artistic or GPL-1+
Programming L
Martin Wuertele writes:
> * Josselin Mouette [2013-05-22 15:03]:
>> When you compare the time it takes to write an upstart job file or a
>> systemd unit file, to the time it takes to proprely test it, I don’t
>> think this argument makes any sense. If the only things we do for
>> improving the d
* John Paul Adrian Glaubitz [2013-05-22 20:57]:
> On 05/22/2013 07:50 PM, Martin Wuertele wrote:
> >Actually it sounds like you propose to stop developing and take
> >everything from Redhat, Lennart, Gnome because it's there and they say
> >so.
>
> And another one. Why is it that almost anyone w
* Josselin Mouette [2013-05-22 20:45]:
> Le mercredi 22 mai 2013 à 19:50 +0200, Martin Wuertele a écrit :
>
> > Seems to me that luckily not everybody agrees with that approach (CTTE
> > #681834, CTTE #688772)...
>
> Fortunately the CTTE failed to expose me before you did, since they
> ended u
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 07:48:27AM +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire (Front Desk) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In the past few days and weeks there have been many advocacies, for new
> applicants and for DM->DD applicants.
>
> Please take advantage of the NM web interface where possible, as it makes
> the process mu
Hello,
As per policy 10.9 - Permissions and owners[0], opensmtpd requires
some system users for running non-root-privileged processes. I propose
to user the following dynamic accounts; opensmtpd, opensmtpq, opensmtpf.
Also I will be co-maintaining this package with Ryan Kavanagh, who has
already
Martin Wuertele writes:
> Seems like you haven't realised yet: only if a maintainer makes
> controversal decisions and several others disagree such a case comes
> before the CTTE.
Having decisions appealed to the CTTE is not a punishment. It just
indicates that a decision is controversial and t
On Mittwoch, 22. Mai 2013, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> I think you're missing Holger's point: FSF has had great success with
> the GNU project. This is independent of the Hurd kernel.
Yet I'm happy to finally see a Debian GNU/Hurd release. Wow! & Whohooo!
signature.asc
Description: This is a digital
On 05/22/2013 06:19 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
> I'm skeptical of the value of such a design in place of just using
> an initramfs, but the 'friendly-recovery' package in Ubuntu gives
> an example of to do this.
live-config-upstart needs the same to be useful. personally i have no
experience with u
Hi,
On 22/05/13 at 15:11 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On May 21, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>
> > We don't need to select a single init system at this point, and it would
> As the maintainer of a package which is strongly tied to the init
> system, I disagree.
>
> > Then, something I failed to find
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 10:53:43PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> There was a GSoC project in 2012 about generating sysvinit scripts from
> systemd .service files. Was there some communication about its outcome?
I had a look at this idea and its result. From what I saw, I do not
believe a conversi
Le mercredi 22 mai 2013 à 21:27 +0200, Martin Wuertele a écrit :
> Seems like you haven't realised yet: only if a maintainer makes
> controversal decisions and several others disagree such a case comes
> before the CTTE.
>
> Having choices ending up twice within relatively short time before the
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 09:13:18PM +0100, Daniel Walrond wrote:
> As per policy 10.9 - Permissions and owners[0], opensmtpd requires
> some system users for running non-root-privileged processes. I propose
> to user the following dynamic accounts; opensmtpd, opensmtpq, opensmtpf.
Thanks for CCing
Daniel Walrond writes:
> As per policy 10.9 - Permissions and owners[0], opensmtpd requires
> some system users for running non-root-privileged processes. I propose
> to user the following dynamic accounts; opensmtpd, opensmtpq, opensmtpf.
> Also I will be co-maintaining this package with Ryan K
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Martin Wuertele writes:
>
>> Seems like you haven't realised yet: only if a maintainer makes
>> controversal decisions and several others disagree such a case comes
>> before the CTTE.
>
> Having decisions appealed to the CTTE is not a punish
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 02:16:34PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> We currently have no good policy about how to name system users, but
> despite that I personally would recommend against using simple
> alphanumeric usernames like those. (They are longer than eight
> characters, which avoids some loc
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 07:45:32PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mercredi 22 mai 2013 à 09:41 -0700, Steve Langasek a écrit :
> > On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 02:45:54PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > > When you compare the time it takes to write an upstart job file or a
> > > systemd unit fi
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 10:39:06PM +0200, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 10:53:43PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > There was a GSoC project in 2012 about generating sysvinit scripts from
> > systemd .service files. Was there some communication about its outcome?
>
> I had a look
Matthias wrote:
>Am 22.05.2013 18:12 schrieb "Lucas Nussbaum" :
>>
>> Note that if it's there, and Ubuntu uses upstart, it has probably been
>> tested. I was not suggesting that we blindly import upstart job files
>> from Ubuntu, but a basis to start from is better than no basis at all.
>> (I can s
> That reminds me. Is there a way to get blhc to tell me *which* line in a
> build log makes it think that compiler flags are hidden?
I agree that would be really useful
> https://buildd.debian.org/~brlink/packages/r/remctl.html is reporting that
> the compiler flags are hidden. So far as I kno
Nick Andrik writes:
> Usually what I do is to copy the whole page and pass it through the
> blhc on my local system.
> In your case I get this message:
> NONVERBOSE BUILD: compiling remctl.c
> Your build logs include:
> make[4]: Entering directory
> `/build/buildd-remctl_3.4-2-amd64-evcdS_/remct
On 2013-05-22 15:39:00 +0200, Bernd Schubert wrote:
> On 05/22/2013 04:50 AM, Uoti Urpala wrote:
> >Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> >>I went through the various init systems threads again during the last
> >>few days. My understanding of the consensus so far is the following:
> >>
> >>- Both systemd and up
>
> * As you may know, systemd is developed by a large amount of
>contributors.
…as you may know, upstart is not only older than systemd, but is also used on a
large amount of live systems, probably many times more the number of systems
that
have systemd installed.*⁾
Best regards,
– Jubal
On 23/05/2013 02:35, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
>> Sure; obviously the right thing to do is to instead take stuff from GNOME
>> > and freedesktop.org without regard to integration with our existing system,
>> > because if Lennart says it's right it must be so.
> Honestly, these personal accus
I really like how this paragraph:
On 23/05/2013 02:41, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> [...]
> And another one. Why is it that almost anyone who isn't favor of
> systemd is directly going off insulting their developers or any
> of the organizations behind of it?
and this paragraph:
> Blame Ca
On 22 May 2013 22:02, Chow Loong Jin wrote:
>> [...] Bazaar (which seems to have been abandoned by
>> upstream with >2000 open bugs [1]) [...].
>
> On the other hand, it would be nice if you keep your FUD to the minimum.
> Bazaar
> doesn't look abandoned[1], and >2000 open bugs is not uncommon. N
On 05/22/2013 04:53 AM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> - Neither systemd nor upstart are likely to be ported to kfreebsd soon,
> as they both rely on many Linux-specific features and interfaces.
Though it should be easy enough to port OpenRC to kFreeBSD and Hurd,
once it completes its support for the c
Steve McIntyre writes:
> Matthias wrote:
> >
> >Please also keep in mind that many upstream projects ship systemd service
> >files. Therefore, most of the systemd work is already done too.
>
> Most? Really? Do you have stats for that?
>
Given the fact that sysvinit scripts are supported by syst
On 05/23/2013 01:45 AM, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> I understand it will be a pain for Ubuntu if Debian picks a different
> init system. I don’t think this is relevant for the discussion, though.
It might be very relevant for many of us that our package works on
*both* Debian and Ubuntu (and other d
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 11:31 PM, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
> On 22 May 2013 22:02, Chow Loong Jin wrote:
>>> [...] Bazaar (which seems to have been abandoned by
>>> upstream with >2000 open bugs [1]) [...].
>>
>> On the other hand, it would be nice if you keep your FUD to the minimum.
>> Bazaar
>> do
On 05/23/2013 02:35 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> Honestly, these personal accusations against Lennart are getting old and
> boring. Don't you really have any other good argument to bring up
> against systemd other than you dislike *one* of the systemd developers?*
>
> [...]
>
> * As you
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 12:37:35AM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Matthias wrote:
> >Am 22.05.2013 18:12 schrieb "Lucas Nussbaum" :
> >>
> >> Note that if it's there, and Ubuntu uses upstart, it has probably been
> >> tested. I was not suggesting that we blindly import upstart job files
> >> from U
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 12:47:46AM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 10:39:06PM +0200, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> > On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 10:53:43PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > > There was a GSoC project in 2012 about generating sysvinit scripts from
> > > systemd .service file
Hello,
On Wed, 22 May 2013 23:05:01 +0200
Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Subject: Bwah I will tell my daddy^W^Wthe CTTE^W^Wa GR
Couldn't you please finally stop behaving like a five years old?
--
WBR, Andrew
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Joss isn't the only one to blame. Could all please stop bashing each other (and
Joss) and stick back to technical arguments? (Saying "I'm sorry" privately to
each other for each ad hominem argument used in this thread would also help!)
I can clearly see what has provoked this reaction and I have
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 12:47:46AM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> Note that such conversion to a sysv init script is not supposed to
> provide all the features that upstart and systemd provide. Else
> there would be no need to move to systemd or upstart in the first
> place.
That is true, and I alre
92 matches
Mail list logo
