Wouter Verhelst writes:
> On 30-05-13 19:29, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> Maybe the best way forward is to have backports activated by default
> No.
> If we're going down that route, we might as well give up on doing a
> stable release.
Two issues keep getting confused when people talk about this,
On Thursday, May 30, 2013 10:56:23 AM Russ Allbery wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst writes:
> > On 30-05-13 19:29, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> >> Maybe the best way forward is to have backports activated by default
> >
> > No.
> >
> > If we're going down that route, we might as well give up on doing a
> > s
On 05/30/2013 03:10 AM, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> I think it makes perfect sense for us to support systemd, openrc, and
> upstart, at least for the time being; I doubt we'll continue supporting
> all three options until the end of times, but we don't have to do that.
I very much like the idea to gi
Le jeudi, 30 mai 2013 15.29:22, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 03:20:29PM +0200, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
> > > Which web browsers would remain in stable if we applied this criterion
> > > consistently?
> >
> > Although that makes me very sad, if we (collectively) give u
Uoti Urpala writes:
> Marc Haber wrote:
>> And it is still completely inferior even to dpkg-conffile handling,
>> which has huge wishes left open as well.
> False. The message you replied to already listed advantages over
> dpkg-conffile handling. This was also already discussed before:
> https:
Quoting Russ Allbery (2013-05-30 19:56:23)
> Wouter Verhelst writes:
> > On 30-05-13 19:29, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>
> >> Maybe the best way forward is to have backports activated by
> >> default
>
> > No.
>
> > If we're going down that route, we might as well give up on doing a
> > stable rel
On 30-05-13 19:53, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 05/30/2013 04:46 PM, Riku Voipio wrote:
>> While we are busy maintaining multiple indirection layers to
>> "support user choice"
>
> I don't think this is what Wouter was talking about (eg, he never said
> we should leave this as a choice to the user).
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:56:23AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> The actual proposal in the bug report is to add backports.debian.org
> to the default sources.list file in the installer, but not otherwise
> change anything about the backports configuration. Specifically, the
> archive would remain
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 06:27:13PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Thu, 30 May 2013 14:16:53 +0200, Olav Vitters
> wrote:
> >On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 12:21:33PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> >> The init system case is special because supporting another init script
> >> system will most probably mean tha
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 09:38:40AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> development (because unlike the systemd developers, the upstart developers
> aren't trying to sell anyone a bill of goods about how their existing units
> are perfect and nothing will ever need to be patched downstream). But there
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 08:29:16PM +0200, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
> > FWIW, I don't. I think the compromise that the security team is proposing is
> > much more reasonable than such an alternative.
>
> That compromise (which I do definitely support for wheezy) puzzles me
> most for the precede
Jonas Smedegaard writes:
> Sorry, what bugreport?
> I do not consider backports.debian.org of same quality as debian.org so
> am concerned by what you outline above, and would like to (at the least)
> read up on the relevant discussion (i.e. avoid rehashing it here).
I'm afraid I've expired the
On 29/05/13 08:18, Chris Knadle wrote:
> On Monday, May 27, 2013 21:02:22, Marco d'Itri wrote:
>> > Now that we are done with systemd for the time being, can we have the
>> > flame war about replacing Exim with Postfix as the default MTA?
>> >
>> > Are there any objections other than "but I like i
On 05/30/2013 08:06 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> FWIW, Ubuntu has done this with their backports repositories for the last two
> years of releases
debian-live images have this by default since squeeze too.
--
Address:Daniel Baumann, Donnerbuehlweg 3, CH-3012 Bern
Email: daniel.
Quoting Thomas Goirand (z...@debian.org):
> 1/ Your parents don't read mail? That is surprising to me. In this days
> and age, everyone does.
Yes.
Out of 5 adult people in my family, all of them read their mail daily.
4 of them do it through a web interface and have absolutely no use of
a mail
On Thu, 30 May 2013 19:45:48 +0200, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez
wrote:
>Maybe is related to cPannel. Seems that cPannel 11.30 shipped Exim 4.69
>and 11.32 Exim 4.77 [2]
Judging from the sheer amount of clueless cpanel users showing up on
exim lists, this is a really big possibilty.
Greetings
Marc
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 09:12:58PM +0200, Olav Vitters wrote:
> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 09:38:40AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > development (because unlike the systemd developers, the upstart developers
> > aren't trying to sell anyone a bill of goods about how their existing units
> > are perf
On Thu, 30 May 2013 08:42:49 -0700, Russ Allbery
wrote:
>Get rid of some of that complexity because it is pointless (you'll find
>that much of it is working around inadequacies in sysvinit).
Explain.
> Get rid of
>more of it by building a static configuration from the dynamic
>configuration whe
Practical question: if I were to support systemd .service, upstart init job
and/or OpenRC together with standard sysvinit script, how do I check
for currently used init system from sysvinit script to not start the service
for a second time?
Is there some material on wiki.d.o I can use (and if
On Thu, 30 May 2013 21:05:50 +0200, Olav Vitters
wrote:
>On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 06:27:13PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
>> And I am also opposing changes that will help in dropping the
>> "universal" out of Debian's claim.
>
>Do you actually run a kernel other than Linux
Actually no, but it is a ple
On Fri, 31 May 2013 01:53:01 +0800, Thomas Goirand
wrote:
>Though, I'm really not sure that if Debian decides to adopt Systemd now,
>rather than a bit later, it will influence its development, or change
>anything at all upstream.
Of course it won't. Upstream and Red Hat have shown many times that
]] Ondřej Surý
> Practical question: if I were to support systemd .service, upstart
> init job and/or OpenRC together with standard sysvinit
> script, how do I check for currently used init system from sysvinit
> script to not start the service for a second time?
With systemd, as long as the in
Please do. Minor is fine (any non-RC bug severity would be fine with me).
Ondřej Surý
On 29. 5. 2013, at 19:05, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
> Hello,
>
> With the recent setup of the parallel build infrastructure using clang
> instead of gcc [1], I would like to start to report
> bugs on packages fa
Russ Allbery wrote:
> Uoti Urpala writes:
> > Marc Haber wrote:
> >> And it is still completely inferior even to dpkg-conffile handling,
> >> which has huge wishes left open as well.
>
> > False. The message you replied to already listed advantages over
> > dpkg-conffile handling. This was also a
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:39:55PM +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote:
> Practical question: if I were to support systemd .service, upstart
> init job and/or OpenRC together with standard sysvinit
> script, how do I check for currently used init system from sysvinit
> script to not start the service for a s
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:00:40PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:39:55PM +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote:
> > Practical question: if I were to support systemd .service, upstart
> > init job and/or OpenRC together with standard sysvinit
> > script, how do I check for currently u
Marc Haber writes:
> Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Get rid of some of that complexity because it is pointless (you'll find
>> that much of it is working around inadequacies in sysvinit).
> Explain.
For example, all the PID file handling is working around the inability to
determine via better mechanis
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 09:05:50PM +0200, Olav Vitters wrote:
> The goal is to make the boot more standard across distributions. So no
> unneeded differences in some configuration files, systemd conf files
> which are generic enough to be included upstream, etc.
> In the current state, each distri
+++ Josh Triplett [2013-05-29 11:50 -0700]:
> Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> > One problematic aspect are the various xul-ext-* packages currently
> > packaged. It's very likely that some of them will break with ESR17
> > and ESR24 in the future.
> >
> > However, there's not much we can do here. We ca
❦ 30 mai 2013 23:07 CEST, Steve Langasek :
>> . /lib/lsb/init-functions
>
>> (Which should be near the top of your init script already.)
>> This will automagically invoke systemd or upstart if appropriate.
>
> No, it won't. What it will do is provide a shell function you can call to
> check if
…many of us have been to hell and back. Please be near-insanely careful when
considering a new init:
http://marc.merlins.org/perso/linux/post_2010-10-24_Ubuntu-Maverick_-Plymouth-Is-the-Worst-Thing-That-Happened-To-Linux.html
Best -
--
Mark
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 02:07:10PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:00:40PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:39:55PM +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote:
> > > Practical question: if I were to support systemd .service, upstart
> > > init job and/or OpenRC to
On May 28, 2013, at 11:49 PM, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Sat, 25 May 2013 11:27:36 -0700, Russ Allbery
> wrote:
>> (The shading of meaning between those two options could be clearer. I
>> took it as a measure of enthusiasm and personally answered "I welcome
>> systemd in Debian" because, regardles
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 11:36:42PM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> ❦ 30 mai 2013 23:07 CEST, Steve Langasek :
> >> . /lib/lsb/init-functions
> >> (Which should be near the top of your init script already.)
> >> This will automagically invoke systemd or upstart if appropriate.
> > No, it won't.
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 02:41:06PM -0700, Mark Symonds wrote:
>
> …many of us have been to hell and back. Please be near-insanely careful when
> considering a new init:
>
> http://marc.merlins.org/perso/linux/post_2010-10-24_Ubuntu-Maverick_-Plymouth-Is-the-Worst-Thing-That-Happened-To-Linux.h
Hi.
For last several weeks I face a Flash Player problem in Ubuntu 12.04. I
open a video to watch. Then, sometimes it opens but several times it occurs
error and black screen appears. I looked for solves on the internet and I
did almost all the advices that people give in forums but it still persis
Dear Halil,
you've reached the Debian development mailing list, this is not a
support channel for Ubuntu!
You should have a look here: http://www.ubuntu.com/support
Regards
Markus
2013/5/30 Halil Kaya :
> Hi.
> For last several weeks I face a Flash Player problem in Ubuntu 12.04. I open
> a vide
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:41:56PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 02:07:10PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:00:40PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:39:55PM +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote:
> > > > Practical question: if I wer
Hi Mark,
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 02:41:06PM -0700, Mark Symonds wrote:
> …many of us have been to hell and back. Please be near-insanely careful
> when considering a new init:
> http://marc.merlins.org/perso/linux/post_2010-10-24_Ubuntu-Maverick_-Plymouth-Is-the-Worst-Thing-That-Happened-To-Lin
Steve Langasek wrote:
> I'm assuming you're talking here about things like /etc/default/locale and
> /etc/default/keyboard, which systemd upstream fails to handle.
>
> I can't speak to other distributions, but in Debian, the systemd maintainers
> are in no position to decide that Debian will agree
❦ 30 mai 2013 23:47 CEST, Steve Langasek :
>> > No, it won't. What it will do is provide a shell function you can call to
>> > check if init is upstart, and if so, neuter your init script:
>
>> > if init_is_upstart; then
>> > exit 1
>> > fi
>
>> > Doing this automatically by including /
Vincent Bernat writes:
> I still use /etc/init.d/ start by habit and I find it convenient to
> divert to systemd but I have no strong opinion on this. As long as
> upstart jobs mask init scripts when booting, we are fine.
Completely independent of the discussion in this thread, I encourage y
On Thursday, May 30, 2013 15:48:14, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
> On 29/05/13 08:18, Chris Knadle wrote:
> > On Monday, May 27, 2013 21:02:22, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> >> > Now that we are done with systemd for the time being, can we have the
> >> > flame war about replacing Exim with Postfix as
On Thursday, May 30, 2013 16:25:15, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> Quoting Thomas Goirand (z...@debian.org):
> > 1/ Your parents don't read mail? That is surprising to me. In this days
> > and age, everyone does.
Unfortunately I'm finding that the above is not always the case. I'm
increasingly runni
The following is a listing of packages for which help has been requested
through the WNPP (Work-Needing and Prospective Packages) system in the
last week.
Total number of orphaned packages: 492 (new: 5)
Total number of packages offered up for adoption: 141 (new: 0)
Total number of packages request
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Micah Anderson
* Package name: python-scrypt
Version : 0.5.3
Upstream Author : Magnus Hallin
* URL : http://bitbucket.org/mhallin/py-scrypt
* License : BSD
Programming Lang: Python
Description : Python bindings f
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 5:11 AM, Mark Symonds wrote:
> If Upstart makes it into Debian
Upstart is already in Debian.
> Dependency based init already works well, to replace it with a hive of bugs
> does not make sense. OpenRC is the only one which claims to be reverse
> compatible,
> if this is
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 04:04:47PM +0200, Bastien ROUCARIES wrote:
> > Cons:
> >
> > - not all crypto libraries are equivalent; choosing one will exclude
> > some functionality provided by others
>
> SEE compat layer
> > - we somehow have to deal with legacy systems that can't convert
> > - adopti
PATRICIA HERNANDEZ MARIN
TRANSPORTES ESPECIALIZADOS JEOMARA
229-989-02-11.
--
Patricia del Carmen Hernandez Marin
Transportes Especializados Jeomara SA de CV
Tel: (229)9890211
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact lis
Russ Allbery (30/05/2013):
> Jonas Smedegaard writes:
> > Sorry, what bugreport?
>
> > I do not consider backports.debian.org of same quality as
> > debian.org so am concerned by what you outline above, and would
> > like to (at the least) read up on the relevant discussion
> > (i.e. avoid rehas
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 01:44:12AM +0300, Uoti Urpala wrote:
> Steve Langasek wrote:
> > I can't speak to other distributions, but in Debian, the systemd maintainers
> > are in no position to decide that Debian will agree to rewrite its
>
> Focusing on "position to decide" seems less than construc
Le 30/05/2013 18:29, Marc Haber a écrit :
> On Thu, 30 May 2013 13:56:02 +0200, Olav Vitters
> wrote:
>> Seems the solutions are very focussed on the assumption that things
>> cannot be changed. E.g. programs currently send email, so email it has
>> to be forever.
>
> It is not a good idea to dro
101 - 152 of 152 matches
Mail list logo
