On 06/23/2011 08:49 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 23.06.2011 14:10, schrieb Steve Clark:
On 06/23/2011 03:29 AM, Benny Amorsen wrote:
Steve Clark writes:
If your are concerned with boot times suspend to disk!
Suspend to disk is dead slow even with an SSD. That really is no
alternative.
Susp
Am 23.06.2011 14:10, schrieb Steve Clark:
> On 06/23/2011 03:29 AM, Benny Amorsen wrote:
>> Steve Clark writes:
>>
>>> If your are concerned with boot times suspend to disk!
>> Suspend to disk is dead slow even with an SSD. That really is no
>> alternative.
>>
>> Suspend to RAM is nice when it w
On 06/23/2011 03:29 AM, Benny Amorsen wrote:
Steve Clark writes:
If your are concerned with boot times suspend to disk!
Suspend to disk is dead slow even with an SSD. That really is no
alternative.
Suspend to RAM is nice when it works which is about 4 times out of 5 on
this laptop. (A great
Steve Clark writes:
> If your are concerned with boot times suspend to disk!
Suspend to disk is dead slow even with an SSD. That really is no
alternative.
Suspend to RAM is nice when it works which is about 4 times out of 5 on
this laptop. (A great improvement over a few years ago, by the way).
On 06/17/2011 02:13 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
> a needed TWO WEEKS to go in updates-testing, this is way roo long for
> such a major bug preventing the user from booting the system and
> it takes time until it is for normal users in stable repos too!
It is not a major bug since it is not common for
Am 17.06.2011 08:31, schrieb Rahul Sundaram:
> On 06/17/2011 11:30 AM, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
>> The actual Linus rule is that if it breaks user stuff it must be fixed
>> now or it will be reverted. Which is not impossible
>
> If we know about the bugs we can fix them. This bug was only reporte
On 06/17/2011 11:30 AM, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> The actual Linus rule is that if it breaks user stuff it must be fixed
> now or it will be reverted. Which is not impossible
If we know about the bugs we can fix them. This bug was only reported
after the release.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
de
Le jeudi 16 juin 2011 à 18:49 -0700, Adam Williamson a écrit :
> On Mon, 2011-06-13 at 07:58 -0400, Steve Clark wrote:
> > On 06/13/2011 03:08 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > > Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> > > > Having a quick look at the link and at the steps to reproduce the bug
> > > > gave me shivers.
On Mon, 2011-06-13 at 07:58 -0400, Steve Clark wrote:
> On 06/13/2011 03:08 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> > > Having a quick look at the link and at the steps to reproduce the bug
> > > gave me shivers. Are we really sure that systemd is ready? I mean, I
> > > don't even call
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 02:56:55AM +0200, Michal Schmidt wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 02:42:15 +0200 Reindl Harald wrote:
> > and why does it STOP the boot-process at a point no network is
> > available?
>
> Mounts from /etc/fstab are considered required unless they are marked
> with the "nofail"
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 6:32 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> I understand the inconsistency and it is indeed a bug in mount.
>
> Nevertheless you are missing the point. If X worked before (X=mounting
> at boot with fstab containing trailing slashes), and stops working now
> because of the change Y I
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 5:32 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>> i think this would be a good idea
>>
>> PHP (my main language) is fighting with traling slash or not troubles
>> over all the years, but there is nothing to stop the boot-process and
>>
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 5:32 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
> i think this would be a good idea
>
> PHP (my main language) is fighting with traling slash or not troubles
> over all the years, but there is nothing to stop the boot-process and
> systemd is a very different level of software
Let's be clea
Am 14.06.2011 15:15, schrieb Jeff Spaleta:
> Is directory path handling with regard to trailing slashes something
> worth adding as an autoQA test target in the future?Not just for
> mount but for a group of commands? Something worth considering? I'm
> happy to write the initial test scrip
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 11:25 PM, drago01 wrote:
> Well you can't expect him to test every possible scenario (no matter
> how trivial it is). I never saw an fstab with a trailing slash so I
> wouldn't have though about testing it either.
Same here. I actually spent a good chunk of my _volunteer
On 06/14/2011 04:56 PM, Steve Clark wrote:
> You already are maintaining multiple UI systems which seem to me to be
> much more complex than
> two different "init" systems.
Not the same thing at all. Maintenance of desktop environments doesn't
affect people outside a few people who do that. If
On 06/14/2011 07:08 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 06/14/2011 04:36 PM, Rudolf Kastl wrote:
I never proposed having alternatives for each of the core systems
either... There is already a viable alternative that works. inittab
contains atm exactly one line... the one with the default runlevel...
an
On 06/14/2011 04:36 PM, Rudolf Kastl wrote:
> I never proposed having alternatives for each of the core systems
> either... There is already a viable alternative that works. inittab
> contains atm exactly one line... the one with the default runlevel...
> and /etc/fstab can be parsed differently if
2011/6/14 Rahul Sundaram :
> On 06/14/2011 03:15 PM, Rudolf Kastl wrote:
>> From experience... i prefer having two tools available atleast to do
>> every single job (especially when they exist) because then i have an
>> easy fallback if one fails. Having upstart installed on rawhide during
>> the f
On 06/14/2011 03:15 PM, Rudolf Kastl wrote:
> From experience... i prefer having two tools available atleast to do
> every single job (especially when they exist) because then i have an
> easy fallback if one fails. Having upstart installed on rawhide during
> the f15 rawhide cycles was quite helpf
2011/6/13 Kevin Kofler :
> Reindl Harald wrote:
>> and even on a new setup this should be a decision of the user
>> at the very beginning what init-system he wants to us
>
> No, the choice of this kind of core under-the-hood system components should
> be a decision of the distribution. To the user,
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 3:05 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 2:48 AM, Michal Schmidt wrote:
>> On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 22:14:27 -0400 Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>>> Having a quick look at the link and at the steps to reproduce the bug
>>> gave me shivers. Are we really sure that systemd i
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 2:48 AM, Michal Schmidt wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 22:14:27 -0400 Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>> Having a quick look at the link and at the steps to reproduce the bug
>> gave me shivers. Are we really sure that systemd is ready? I mean, I
>> don't even call my code "alpha" if it
Lucas wrote:
> REMOVED /sbin/start_udev - this means that upstart wont be able to start
> udev without manual tweak. Upstart reads rc.sysinit and there is still
> "/sbin/start_udev". And also this means that any one who will try to use
> upstart in Fedora 16 (now rawhide) wont get udev works.
>
>
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 16:23:51 +0400, L wrote:
> I wont be really upset if I'll lose upstart, I can clean systemd as I need,
> but the idea is wrong.
> Systemd is just a project, project which may tomorrow be changed,
And Upstart is not?
> so why all others have to follow.
You also follow in
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 00:27:43 +0200, RH wrote:
> this time "systemd" is not trustable since if there is a problem
> with httpd the anser of a "service start" is OK and the service was
> not started
> [root@testserver:~]$ service httpd start
> Starting httpd (via systemctl): [ OK ]
Then use /bin/
On 06/13/2011 11:39 AM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
. At this point I am
> going to ask for someone from the Community Working Group to step in
> and see how we can better get along here. If you have a problem with
> that, I think it would be better if you took some time off and did
> something els
On Sun, 2011-06-12 at 23:39 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
> Am 12.06.2011 23:35, schrieb Josh Boyer:
> > On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 5:23 PM, Reindl Harald
> > wrote:
> >> PLEASE give us a option for systems upgraded with yum
> >> NOT USING "systemd" and force "upstart" as before
> >>
> >> * the system
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 16:45:57 +0100
Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 11:39:02AM -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>
> > I do not regularly agree with Kevin Kofler, but you can call him
> > what you want in private email til the days are done. At this point
> > I am going to ask f
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:55:02AM -0400, Jared K. Smith wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 3:14 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
> > because your fukcing holy cow
>
> This type of language is inappropriate for a Fedora mailing list.
> Please tone down the language.
I'd go further than that. Swearing is n
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 11:39:02AM -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> I do not regularly agree with Kevin Kofler, but you can call him what
> you want in private email til the days are done. At this point I am
> going to ask for someone from the Community Working Group to step in
> and see how w
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 03:30, Reindl Harald wrote:
> Am 13.06.2011 09:25, schrieb Michal Schmidt:
>> Stop the profanities and insults, or stop posting to this mailing
>> list.
>
> sorry but for a answer like below form Kevin Kofler i have no other
> words as "idiot", really! where is defined taht
Am Montag, den 13.06.2011, 01:47 +0200 schrieb Reindl Harald:
>
> Am 13.06.2011 00:54, schrieb Christoph Wickert:
> > Am Sonntag, den 12.06.2011, 23:23 +0200 schrieb Reindl Harald:
> >> PLEASE give us a option for systems upgraded with yum
> >> NOT USING "systemd" and force "upstart" as before
> >
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 3:14 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
> because your fukcing holy cow
This type of language is inappropriate for a Fedora mailing list.
Please tone down the language.
--
Jared Smith
Fedora Project Leader
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedorapro
On 06/13/2011 06:10 PM, Steve Clark wrote:
> On 06/13/2011 08:23 AM, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
>> * Steve Clark [13/06/2011 14:04] :
>>> Maybe Fedora should adhere to Linus's rule that we don't have regressions
>>> that break users stuff.
>> Linus has no such thing. Google the min/max incident and th
On 06/13/2011 05:28 PM, Steve Clark wrote:
> Maybe Fedora should adhere to Linus's rule that we don't have
> regressions that break users stuff.
> I get the impression Fedora doesn't care about users and is only
> interested in pushing the agenda
> of the developers. It is too bad that Fedora doesn
On 06/13/2011 08:23 AM, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
* Steve Clark [13/06/2011 14:04] :
Maybe Fedora should adhere to Linus's rule that we don't have regressions that
break users stuff.
Linus has no such thing. Google the min/max incident and the amount of drivers
that were removed from the kernel t
On 06/13/2011 03:27 PM, Alexander Kurtakov wrote:
> On 02:12:43 PM Monday, June 13, 2011 Lucas wrote:
>> >PLEASE give us a option for systems upgraded with yum
>> >NOT USING "systemd" and force "upstart" as before
>> >
>> >* the system is running since years
>> >* every dist-upgrade via y
* Steve Clark [13/06/2011 14:04] :
>
> Maybe Fedora should adhere to Linus's rule that we don't have regressions
> that break users stuff.
Linus has no such thing. Google the min/max incident and the amount of drivers
that were removed from the kernel tree before 2.4.0's release if you want proof
On 06/13/2011 03:08 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
Having a quick look at the link and at the steps to reproduce the bug
gave me shivers. Are we really sure that systemd is ready? I mean, I
don't even call my code "alpha" if it can't parse a slash correctly.
How is it systemd's fa
On 02:12:43 PM Monday, June 13, 2011 Lucas wrote:
> >PLEASE give us a option for systems upgraded with yum
> >NOT USING "systemd" and force "upstart" as before
> >
> >* the system is running since years
> >* every dist-upgrade via yum was no problem
> >* now see screenshot
> >* WTF is there
On 01:59:43 PM Monday, June 13, 2011 Reindl Harald wrote:
> Am 13.06.2011 05:58, schrieb Kevin Kofler:
> > Reindl Harald wrote:
> >> and even on a new setup this should be a decision of the user
> >> at the very beginning what init-system he wants to us
> >
> > No, the choice of this kind of core
Reindl Harald wrote:
> and some are not realizing that we are not speaking about a sound-daemon
> stopping you hear music
>
> we are speaking about the most important component of the system!
That's exactly why we shouldn't let users replace it at random.
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing
On 06/13/2011 11:40 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 13.06.2011 09:37, schrieb Michal Schmidt:
>> On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 11:26:46 +0400 Lucas wrote:
>>> Have you notice that they use Fedora like a toy, to play with, to
>>> test a new ideas, to try new things on it. Developers do not count it
>>> like
Reindl Harald wrote:
> Am 13.06.2011 05:58, schrieb Kevin Kofler:
>> No, the choice of this kind of core under-the-hood system components
>> should be a decision of the distribution.
>
> thats freedom?
You have the freedom to fork Fedora. Good luck!
A distribution is about integration of differe
Am 13.06.2011 09:37, schrieb Michal Schmidt:
> On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 11:26:46 +0400 Lucas wrote:
>> Have you notice that they use Fedora like a toy, to play with, to
>> test a new ideas, to try new things on it. Developers do not count it
>> like anything serious - it is a toy for them. Today they
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 11:26:46 +0400 Lucas wrote:
> Have you notice that they use Fedora like a toy, to play with, to
> test a new ideas, to try new things on it. Developers do not count it
> like anything serious - it is a toy for them. Today they decided that
> upstart is wrong and they need system
Hi,
On 06/12/2011 11:23 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
May I point out that we've a be excellent to each other
policy on this mailing list. Your latest series of emails
seems to be anything but excellent, please stop this.
You're clearly unhappy about the switch to systemd,
my cents on that are that
Am 13.06.2011 09:25, schrieb Michal Schmidt:
> Stop the profanities and insults, or stop posting to this mailing
> list.
sorry but for a answer like below form Kevin Kofler i have no other
words as "idiot", really! where is defined taht it is invalid
and why only for systemd if it is so well desig
>PLEASE give us a option for systems upgraded with yum
>NOT USING "systemd" and force "upstart" as before
>
>* the system is running since years
>* every dist-upgrade via yum was no problem
>* now see screenshot
>* WTF is there to relabel if started with "selinux=0"-kernel-param
>
>WHY IN
Stop the profanities and insults, or stop posting to this mailing
list.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Am 13.06.2011 09:08, schrieb Kevin Kofler:
> Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>> Having a quick look at the link and at the steps to reproduce the bug
>> gave me shivers. Are we really sure that systemd is ready? I mean, I
>> don't even call my code "alpha" if it can't parse a slash correctly.
>
> How is it
Am 13.06.2011 08:48, schrieb Michal Schmidt:
> On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 22:14:27 -0400 Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>> Having a quick look at the link and at the steps to reproduce the bug
>> gave me shivers. Are we really sure that systemd is ready? I mean, I
>> don't even call my code "alpha" if it can't pa
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 09:08:02 +0200 Kevin Kofler wrote:
> How is it systemd's fault that the user's fstab is invalid?
A trailing slash in the mountpoint is not too common, but valid.
Michal
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Am 13.06.2011 05:58, schrieb Kevin Kofler:
> Reindl Harald wrote:
>> and even on a new setup this should be a decision of the user
>> at the very beginning what init-system he wants to us
>
> No, the choice of this kind of core under-the-hood system components should
> be a decision of the dist
Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> Having a quick look at the link and at the steps to reproduce the bug
> gave me shivers. Are we really sure that systemd is ready? I mean, I
> don't even call my code "alpha" if it can't parse a slash correctly.
How is it systemd's fault that the user's fstab is invalid?
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 22:14:27 -0400 Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> Having a quick look at the link and at the steps to reproduce the bug
> gave me shivers. Are we really sure that systemd is ready? I mean, I
> don't even call my code "alpha" if it can't parse a slash correctly.
Strictly speaking, it parses
Christoph Wickert wrote:
> systems upgraded with yum still have upstart installed (I did it myself)
This has been fixed since:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=707507
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/list
Reindl Harald wrote:
> and even on a new setup this should be a decision of the user
> at the very beginning what init-system he wants to us
No, the choice of this kind of core under-the-hood system components should
be a decision of the distribution. To the user, it should be only an
implementa
On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 9:26 PM, Michal Schmidt wrote:
> Have you looked at the bug I linked to?
>> > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=709681
> Is it relevant for your situation?
>
Having a quick look at the link and at the steps to reproduce the bug
gave me shivers. Are we really sur
Am 13.06.2011 03:26, schrieb Michal Schmidt:
> On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 03:01:19 +0200 Reindl Harald wrote:
>> Am 13.06.2011 02:56, schrieb Michal Schmidt:
>> interesting: "mount /mnt/storage" manually works after that
>> exclude the mountpint in /etc/fstab results in normal boot
>> and you have ever
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 03:01:19 +0200 Reindl Harald wrote:
> Am 13.06.2011 02:56, schrieb Michal Schmidt:
> > On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 02:42:15 +0200 Reindl Harald wrote:
> >> and why does it STOP the boot-process at a point no network is
> >> available?
> >
> > Mounts from /etc/fstab are considered requi
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 02:44:36 +0200 Reindl Harald wrote:
> but it shows that the widely use of "systemd" is too soon because
> this crap has to say "FAILED" and not "OK" in this case!
Apparently the httpd initscript returned with exit code 0.
A service can fail after starting successfully.
Michal
Am 13.06.2011 02:56, schrieb Michal Schmidt:
> On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 02:42:15 +0200 Reindl Harald wrote:
>> and why does it STOP the boot-process at a point no network is
>> available?
>
> Mounts from /etc/fstab are considered required unless they are marked
> with the "nofail" option.
>
>> why d
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 02:42:15 +0200 Reindl Harald wrote:
> and why does it STOP the boot-process at a point no network is
> available?
Mounts from /etc/fstab are considered required unless they are marked
with the "nofail" option.
> why does it start the relabel service i never see with selinux=0
Am 13.06.2011 02:42, schrieb Michal Schmidt:
> On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 00:16:00 +0200 Reindl Harald wrote:
>> [Sun Jun 12 23:30:40 2011] [error] (2)No such file or directory:
>> could not create /var/run/httpd/httpd.pid [Sun Jun 12 23:30:40 2011]
>> [error] httpd: could not log pid to file /var/run/h
Am 13.06.2011 02:38, schrieb Michal Schmidt:
> On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 23:23:30 +0200 Reindl Harald wrote:
>> * now see screenshot
>
> That's probably
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=709681
>
>> * WTF is there to relabel if started with "selinux=0"-kernel-param
>
> Although fedora-a
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 00:16:00 +0200 Reindl Harald wrote:
> [Sun Jun 12 23:30:40 2011] [error] (2)No such file or directory:
> could not create /var/run/httpd/httpd.pid [Sun Jun 12 23:30:40 2011]
> [error] httpd: could not log pid to file /var/run/httpd/httpd.pid
>
> well this is the F14 build of Ap
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 23:23:30 +0200 Reindl Harald wrote:
> * now see screenshot
That's probably
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=709681
> * WTF is there to relabel if started with "selinux=0"-kernel-param
Although fedora-autorelabel.service is there, it does not imply that
anything is
Am 13.06.2011 02:28, schrieb John Dulaney:
>> not today but in some months
>
> How so? How is it that in 'some months' you will be forced to use
> systemd? Are the Chinese going to torture you until you make the
> switch?
F14 EOL?
No Kernel 2.6.38 while Kernel-Update in the support-cycle not s
> Am 13.06.2011 00:04, schrieb John Dulaney:
> >> PLEASE give us a option for systems upgraded with yum
> >> NOT USING "systemd" and force "upstart" as before
> >
> > No one is stopping you from packaging upstart (assuming someone hasn't done
> > so) for F15.
>
> it is in the repos
> and it is
Am 13.06.2011 00:54, schrieb Christoph Wickert:
> Am Sonntag, den 12.06.2011, 23:23 +0200 schrieb Reindl Harald:
>> PLEASE give us a option for systems upgraded with yum
>> NOT USING "systemd" and force "upstart" as before
>
> systems upgraded with yum still have upstart installed (I did it myse
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 12:27 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 13.06.2011 00:23, schrieb Steve Clark:
>> On 06/12/2011 06:18 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
don't you know you will save 15-30 seconds each time you boot
up
>>> someone come out there and show me how will a 20 second-reboot on t
Am Sonntag, den 12.06.2011, 23:23 +0200 schrieb Reindl Harald:
> PLEASE give us a option for systems upgraded with yum
> NOT USING "systemd" and force "upstart" as before
systems upgraded with yum still have upstart installed (I did it myself)
and you can select the init as a kernel parameter, so
Am 13.06.2011 00:23, schrieb Steve Clark:
> On 06/12/2011 06:18 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>> don't you know you will save 15-30 seconds each time you boot
>>> up
>> someone come out there and show me how will a 20 second-reboot on the
>> vmware-guest production servers will get 20 seconds faster
On 06/12/2011 06:18 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 13.06.2011 00:13, schrieb Steve Clark:
WTF every three years a new pig is forced to run through the city
and if any subsystem is runnign well and debugged some idiot
comes out of his hole and try replace and force everybody
to use it
don't you
Am 13.06.2011 00:04, schrieb John Dulaney:
>> PLEASE give us a option for systems upgraded with yum
>> NOT USING "systemd" and force "upstart" as before
>
> No one is stopping you from packaging upstart (assuming someone hasn't done
> so) for F15.
it is in the repos
and it is replaced by "syste
Am 13.06.2011 00:13, schrieb Steve Clark:
>> WTF every three years a new pig is forced to run through the city
>> and if any subsystem is runnign well and debugged some idiot
>> comes out of his hole and try replace and force everybody
>> to use it
>>
> don't you know you will save 15-30 seconds
Am 13.06.2011 00:00, schrieb Mike Chambers:
> On Sun, 2011-06-12 at 23:23 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>> I DO NOT NEED SYSTEMD ON 20 SERVERS HERE BECAUSE THEY ARE STARTING
>> FAST ENOUGH AND I NEED NO MAGIC WHICH THINKS KNOWS WHAT TO START
>> IN WHICH ORDER SINCE I KNOW WHAT IS RUNNING ON MY S
On 06/12/2011 05:39 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 12.06.2011 23:35, schrieb Josh Boyer:
On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 5:23 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
PLEASE give us a option for systems upgraded with yum
NOT USING "systemd" and force "upstart" as before
* the system is running since years
* every dist
Am 12.06.2011 23:58, schrieb Frank Murphy:
> On 12/06/11 22:54, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>
>>
>> Am 12.06.2011 23:45, schrieb Josh Boyer:
>>
why are users of running systems are forced to change their
init-system to "systemd"? "upstart" is in the repos but ignored
>
>
> Try yum install up
> PLEASE give us a option for systems upgraded with yum
> NOT USING "systemd" and force "upstart" as before
No one is stopping you from packaging upstart (assuming someone hasn't done so)
for F15.
> * the system is running since years
> * every dist-upgrade via yum was no problem
> * now see
On Sun, 2011-06-12 at 23:23 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
> I DO NOT NEED SYSTEMD ON 20 SERVERS HERE BECAUSE THEY ARE STARTING
> FAST ENOUGH AND I NEED NO MAGIC WHICH THINKS KNOWS WHAT TO START
> IN WHICH ORDER SINCE I KNOW WHAT IS RUNNING ON MY SYSTEMS
Why run Fedora itself on 20 servers? Those a
On 12/06/11 22:54, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 12.06.2011 23:45, schrieb Josh Boyer:
>
>>> why are users of running systems are forced to change their
>>> init-system to "systemd"? "upstart" is in the repos but ignored
Try yum install upstart,
kernel arg init=/sbin/upstart
YMMV.
--
Regards,
Am 12.06.2011 23:45, schrieb Josh Boyer:
>> why are users of running systems are forced to change their
>> init-system to "systemd"? "upstart" is in the repos but ignored
>
> I actually don't know the answer to this question other than "Fedora
> switched to systemd"
cool - on linux the apple-w
Am 12.06.2011 23:43, schrieb John R. Dennison:
> On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 11:39:17PM +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>
>> WTF every three years a new pig is forced to run through the city
>> and if any subsystem is runnign well and debugged some idiot
>> comes out of his hole and try replace and forc
On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 5:39 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 12.06.2011 23:35, schrieb Josh Boyer:
>> On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 5:23 PM, Reindl Harald
>> wrote:
>>> PLEASE give us a option for systems upgraded with yum
>>> NOT USING "systemd" and force "upstart" as before
>>>
>>> * the system is
On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 11:39:17PM +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> WTF every three years a new pig is forced to run through the city
> and if any subsystem is runnign well and debugged some idiot
> comes out of his hole and try replace and force everybody
> to use it
I don't agree with the design
Am 12.06.2011 23:35, schrieb Josh Boyer:
> On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 5:23 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>> PLEASE give us a option for systems upgraded with yum
>> NOT USING "systemd" and force "upstart" as before
>>
>> * the system is running since years
>> * every dist-upgrade via yum was no problem
On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 5:23 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
> PLEASE give us a option for systems upgraded with yum
> NOT USING "systemd" and force "upstart" as before
>
> * the system is running since years
> * every dist-upgrade via yum was no problem
> * now see screenshot
> * WTF is there to relabel
90 matches
Mail list logo
