On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 02:00:45 -0400
David Malcolm wrote:
...snip...
> - build ordering was much more important than I hoped; most of the
> failures in this run seem to be due to incomplete deps in root.log. I
> intend to retry these from the now-existing CVS tags, with a better
> build ordering
On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 20:35 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Jul 2010, Colin Walters wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
> > >
> > > I think the bigger question is why are we doing this?
> >
> > There's some motivation here:
> > http://0pointer.de/blog/project
Jesse Keating writes:
> master -> origin/master
> f13 -> origin/f13/master
> f12 -> origin/f12/master
Please don't. The remote and local branches should be named the same so
that "git checkout -t origin/whatever" does the right thing.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, sch...@redhat.com
GPG Key fin
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 9:55 AM, Jon Masters wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 20:35 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
>> On Wed, 21 Jul 2010, Colin Walters wrote:
>>
>> > On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
>> > >
>> > > I think the bigger question is why are we doing this?
>> >
>> > Ther
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 7:51 AM, Mamoru Tasaka
wrote:
> Richard W.M. Jones wrote, at 07/22/2010 03:45 PM +9:00:
>> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:54:32AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
>>> right now a glibc build is going on that has --enablekernel=2.6.32
>>>
>>> from Jakub
>>>
>>> Bumping that from 2.6
On 07/22/2010 11:30 AM, pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> Well, as I firstly thought so, I tried scratch build with adding "uname -a"
>> and
>> it returned the below, for example.
>>
>> Linux x86-09.phx2.fedoraproject.org 2.6.32-44.el6.x86_64 #1 SMP Wed Jul 7
>> 15:47:50 EDT 2010 i686 i686 i386
On 07/22/2010 10:19 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Jesse Keating writes:
>
>> master -> origin/master
>> f13 -> origin/f13/master
>> f12 -> origin/f12/master
>
> Please don't. The remote and local branches should be named the same so
> that "git checkout -t origin/whatever" does the right thing.
On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 11:48 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On 07/21/2010 01:55 AM, Hans Ulrich Niedermann wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-07-20 at 22:15 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> >> On 07/20/2010 08:55 PM, Garrett Holmstrom wrote:
> >>> If rawhide development is supposed to happen on origin/master, the
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 09:55, Jon Masters wrote:
>>
>> This should probably say "systemd for F16"
>
> +1 FWIW. I'm not a huge sysv fanboi either, but I do care about the
> experience of sysadmins and the upstream for other projects, and I would
> like to see some soak time for this before everyon
On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 10:19 +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Jesse Keating writes:
>
> > master -> origin/master
> > f13 -> origin/f13/master
> > f12 -> origin/f12/master
>
> Please don't. The remote and local branches should be named the same so
> that "git checkout -t origin/whatever" does the
2010/7/21 Dennis Gilmore :
> what this does mean is that you can no longer use rhel5 to build fedora 14
> and newer packages. though you had to jump though hoops already to do this
That also means many people will not be able to run f14 on their vservers.
- Thomas
--
devel mailing list
devel@l
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502358
manuel wolfshant changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
On Thursday 22 July 2010 10:19:20, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Jesse Keating writes:
> > master -> origin/master
> > f13 -> origin/f13/master
> > f12 -> origin/f12/master
>
> Please don't. The remote and local branches should be named the same so
> that "git checkout -t origin/whatever" does the rig
Jan Vcelak writes:
> On Thursday 22 July 2010 10:19:20, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>> Jesse Keating writes:
>> > master -> origin/master
>> > f13 -> origin/f13/master
>> > f12 -> origin/f12/master
>>
>> Please don't. The remote and local branches should be named the same so
>> that "git checkout -t
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 10:21:07AM +0200, drago01 wrote:
> FWIW this is the reason why upstart pretty much ended being a renamed
> sysvinit without offering any benefits because people are afraid of
> change.
That's what we call a successful transition. Now, we can incrementally
introduce improvem
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 12:06:34 +1000
Dave Airlie wrote:
>
> >
> > It is needed:
> >
> > if [ $1 -eq 1 ] ; then
> > # For new installations, hook unit file into the
> > appropriate places via symlinks /usr/bin/systemd-install enable
> > --realize=reload %{unit name}.service > /dev/null 2>
Once upon a time, Lennart Poettering said:
> Or to turn this around: many folks parse the output of ifconfig. And
> that's just wrong on so many levels. We try to do better and actually
> provide you with a proper interface for people who want to parse our
> output.
For a counter-example: the LVM
Once upon a time, Lennart Poettering said:
> The logic behind chkconfig is exposed in many ways in the user
> interface, for example in the chkconfig command line, e.g.
> commands such as "resetpriorities", and stuff like that.
The common chkconfig options are on, off, and probably --list. For
s
Once upon a time, Stephen John Smoogen said:
> If this is how you normally deal with problems, I am beginning to
> understand why pulseaudio has had such a bad reputation. A) You read
> everything that matt said as a personal attack of trying to find deep
> fault and then you go off in a temper ta
Once upon a time, Lennart Poettering said:
> if [ $1 -eq 0 ] ; then
> /usr/bin/systemd-install disable --realize=yes %{unit name}.service >
> /dev/null 2>&1 || :
> fi
Umm, that's copying one of the much-mocked things of Windows, where you
click "Start" to shutdown. "systemd-install" to
Once upon a time, Sam Varshavchik said:
> I'm not sure it's a good idea for udev to come up as soon as Anaconda
> installs the rpm on a freshly-partitioned and formatted disk, before the
> rest of the system gets installed.
Isn't it against the packaging guidelines to actually start something
f
Once upon a time, Lennart Poettering said:
> So, please, when Jef finishes his work, or I find the time to, we will
> provide chkconfig compat too (at least to a certain degree). However,
> doing this is actually just the cherry on top of the topping of our
> delicous cake. But even without the ch
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 10:21:07AM +0200, drago01 wrote:
>> FWIW this is the reason why upstart pretty much ended being a renamed
>> sysvinit without offering any benefits because people are afraid of
>> change.
>
> That's what we call a suc
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 3:24 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 02:00:45 -0400
> David Malcolm wrote:
>
> ...snip...
>
>> - build ordering was much more important than I hoped; most of the
>> failures in this run seem to be due to incomplete deps in root.log. I
>> intend to retry these f
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 02:00:45AM -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-07-20 at 20:02 -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
> > I'm planning to do a partial mass-rebuild for Python 2.7.
> >
> > This would cover all Python 2 users within the distribution, roughly
> > 1000 src.rpms.
> >
> > Some notes
When: Friday, 2010-07-23 @ 16:00 UTC (12 PM EST)
Where: #fedora-bugzappers on irc.freenode.net
It's that time again: blocker bug review meeting time! Friday is the
SECOND blocker bug review meeting for the Fedora 14 Alpha.
Here are the current bugs listed as blocking the Alpha release. We'll be
Hey,
If you're a proventester (or whatever they are called now) please can
you test https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gnome-packagekit-2.30.3-1.fc13
-- it's got a few nice bugfixes including one which is a crasher and
is generating a fair amount of dupes.
Thanks.
Richard.
--
devel mailing
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 02:38:36PM +0200, drago01 wrote:
> > That's what we call a successful transition. Now, we can incrementally
> > introduce improvements over the next few releases.
> Once you start doing that people will cry because it is different from
> what they are used too (does not matt
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 07:31:22AM -0500, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Lennart Poettering said:
> > if [ $1 -eq 0 ] ; then
> > /usr/bin/systemd-install disable --realize=yes %{unit name}.service
> > > /dev/null 2>&1 || :
> > fi
>
> Umm, that's copying one of the much-mocked thi
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010, David Malcolm wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-07-20 at 20:02 -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
> > I'm planning to do a partial mass-rebuild for Python 2.7.
> >
> > This would cover all Python 2 users within the distribution, roughly
> > 1000 src.rpms.
> >
> > Some notes can be seen at:
> > h
When: Friday, 2010-07-23 @ 16:00 UTC (12 PM EST)
Where: #fedora-bugzappers on irc.freenode.net
It's that time again: blocker bug review meeting time! Friday is the
SECOND blocker bug review meeting for the Fedora 14 Alpha.
Here are the current bugs listed as blocking the Alpha release. We'll be
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 3:22 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 02:38:36PM +0200, drago01 wrote:
>> > That's what we call a successful transition. Now, we can incrementally
>> > introduce improvements over the next few releases.
>> Once you start doing that people will cry because
I am orphaning minirpc, it is declared deprecated upstream:
http://minirpc.cs.cmu.edu/ and we at CMU are not using it anymore for
our projects.
It also has some never-fixed bugs occasionally triggered by its test
suite, related to threading and (probably) use-after-free. Because of
this, the test
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 8:52 AM, drago01 wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 3:22 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
>
>> (And
>> that those who have to pay this cost are "crying".)
>
> Everyone has to pay this cost and everyone gets something in return.
That's not what you are hearing from the system admin
Once upon a time, drago01 said:
> No I am just saying that a change isn't bad because it is a change.
And others (like me) are just saying that a change isn't good because it
is new.
There's a middle ground that needs to be found, but repeating either of
"change==bad" or "new==good" doesn't help
On Wed, 21.07.10 23:56, Matthew Miller (mat...@mattdm.org) wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 05:25:19AM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > Now, after discussing this over 2years with many folks and reading up on
> > launchd and SMF and the opinions on the net, we then distilled of the
> > requ
On Thu, 22.07.10 03:55, Jon Masters (jonat...@jonmasters.org) wrote:
> > I was pretty clear in everything you cut off about the whole "You know
> > what people need, they need this" and the whole developers making things
> > for sysadmins because they think sysadmins need it thing. 0pointer.de is
Hi,
We are working on an Eclipse plug-in for Fedora Packagers, which provides
tooling for RPM packaging for Fedora (without needing to resort to CLI). Since
we are planning on supporting dist-git, it would be nice if there was a list of
all Git repos we could query. For example, somebody intere
On Thu, 22.07.10 09:13, Chris Adams (cmad...@hiwaay.net) wrote:
> IMHO, systemd seems to cram a bunch of existing things (init, inetd,
> chkconfig, service, pstree, etc.) together, and the assumption is that
> this is new and good. I don't really agree. For example, if on-demand
> activation for
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 04:18:34PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> Fedora. Now, who's right? It's unlikely that we can figure that out for
> sure, given that Fedora is a lot of things to a lot of people, so our
> two opposite opinions even out in a zero sum game.
> Oh, if we only had a committee
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 03:52:06PM +0200, drago01 wrote:
> >> > That's what we call a successful transition. Now, we can incrementally
> >> > introduce improvements over the next few releases.
> >> Once you start doing that people will cry because it is different from
> >> what they are used too (d
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502358
--- Comment #18 from Iain Arnell 2010-07-22 11:13:18 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #16)
Thanks for picking this one up. (And the
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 11:11:31AM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 03:52:06PM +0200, drago01 wrote:
> > Everyone has to pay this cost and everyone gets something in return.
>
> And the way you present this as an _overall win_ is by emphasizing the
> returns and decreasing th
On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 08:39 -0400, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 3:24 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 02:00:45 -0400
> > David Malcolm wrote:
> >
> > ...snip...
> >
> >> - build ordering was much more important than I hoped; most of the
> >> failures in this run see
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 16:49:50 +0200
Lennart Poettering wrote:
> 1. Parallelization: we can completely get rid of any serialization of
> startup. We can start *every* signle daemon at the same time in one
> big step, regardless whether one of them needs another. i.e. we can
> start avahi at the sam
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 16:49:50 +0200
Lennart Poettering wrote:
> 3. Robustness: The sockets stay around all the time, and always
> connectable. You can kill a daemon but you won't lose a single
> connection while doing that! Particularly for stateless protocols
> (such as DNS or syslog) we can auto
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 16:49:50 +0200
> Lennart Poettering wrote:
>
> > 1. Parallelization: we can completely get rid of any serialization of
> > startup. We can start *every* signle daemon at the same time in one
> > big step, regardless whether one of them
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 10:42:19AM -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
> In addition to circular deps, have any studies been done on disk
> contention when you just start everything all at once? If we're not
> careful we could actually increase boot time in some scenarios. I guess
> one way to check would
On Thu, 22.07.10 11:29, Simo Sorce (sso...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > they hence would have needed to be started one after the other, so
> > that every service using another services can be sure it can talk to
> > the one it needs. I mean, how awesome is that? We can completely
> > remove *any* kind o
On Thu, 22.07.10 10:42, Mike McGrath (mmcgr...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > how do you deal with circular dependencies in this case?
> > I mean what will happen ? Will all services just deadlock?
> > Malfunction ? Anything that guarantees correct initialization and
> > behavior ?
>
> In addition to cir
Lennart Poettering píše v Čt 22. 07. 2010 v 18:35 +0200:
> If a service A uses functionality provided by a service B which in turn
> uses functionality provided by A then things willbreak regardless
> whether systemd is used or not.
>
> Cyclic dependencies cause deadlocks. Introducing systemd has
On Thu, 22.07.10 18:48, Miloslav Trmač (m...@volny.cz) wrote:
> Lennart Poettering píše v Čt 22. 07. 2010 v 18:35 +0200:
> > If a service A uses functionality provided by a service B which in turn
> > uses functionality provided by A then things willbreak regardless
> > whether systemd is used or
On Thu, 22.07.10 11:31, Simo Sorce (sso...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
> On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 16:49:50 +0200
> Lennart Poettering wrote:
>
> > 3. Robustness: The sockets stay around all the time, and always
> > connectable. You can kill a daemon but you won't lose a single
> > connection while doing th
On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 11:28 -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 08:39 -0400, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 3:24 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > > On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 02:00:45 -0400
> > > David Malcolm wrote:
> > >
> > > ...snip...
> > >
> > >> - build ordering was muc
On Thursday, July 22, 2010 01:45:37 am Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:54:32AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> > right now a glibc build is going on that has --enablekernel=2.6.32
> >
> > from Jakub
> >
> > Bumping that from 2.6.18 used currently means e.g. to get rid of com
On 07/13/2010 07:24 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> Heya,
>
> as many of you probably know systemd got accepted as feature for F-14 by
> FESCO a few weeks back.
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/systemd
I just want to say that I am excited to explore this new system, but very
concerned
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 8:48 AM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> Looking at what Windows and MacOS do in this area is probably
> healthy. Both systems rearrange sectors on disk and parallelize as much
> as possible. I think that's bascially a good recipe we should follow
> too. systemd caters for the
On Thu, 22.07.10 11:00, Matthew Miller (mat...@mattdm.org) wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 04:18:34PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > Fedora. Now, who's right? It's unlikely that we can figure that out for
> > sure, given that Fedora is a lot of things to a lot of people, so our
> > two o
Lennart Poettering píše v Čt 22. 07. 2010 v 19:12 +0200:
> What was discussed by FESCO was whether we should make it the default in
> F14. And FESCO said yes.
That's not what I understand from
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2010-06-15/fesco.2010-06-15-19.35.log.html#l-446
. Was
On Thu, 22.07.10 09:11, Jeff Spaleta (jspal...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 8:48 AM, Lennart Poettering
> wrote:
> > Looking at what Windows and MacOS do in this area is probably
> > healthy. Both systems rearrange sectors on disk and parallelize as much
> > as possible. I think
On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 13:07 -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
[snip]
> I messed up, and there's a bug in which python doesn't startup if
> python-devel is not installed, which led to the majority of the "noarch"
> builds failing. [1]
>
> Sorry about that. I'm working on a fixed python package.
Hope
On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 09:22 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> I am not getting the message from this thread that systemd developers
> believe that. Rather, we get "it's clearly a matter of taste and
> bike-shedding", and "I probably shouldn't even have bothered to even reply
> to this mail of yours."
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 9:46 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Can we please stick to the technical issues here? That is, how we should
> implement systemd to make the transition from upstart/sysv as painless
> as possible, and perhaps some semantic improvements to the parameters
> and command names Le
On Thu, 22.07.10 08:05, Simo Sorce (sso...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > to make real; give reality to (a hope, fear, plan, etc.).
> >
> > but its seems quite an abstract term to associate reality with an
> > abstract computer object.
>
> Dave, I am not a native speaker, but I have the exact (or may b
On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 20:40 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> Kay and I have discussed this now. We agreed to fold systemd-install
> into systemctl entirely, and replace --realize by --now. Also, we'll
> drop some of the options --realize had, and always imply that the init
> system configuration
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/22/2010 01:19 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Jesse Keating writes:
>
>> master -> origin/master
>> f13 -> origin/f13/master
>> f12 -> origin/f12/master
>
> Please don't. The remote and local branches should be named the same so
> that "git check
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/22/2010 02:19 AM, Hans Ulrich Niedermann wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 10:19 +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>> Jesse Keating writes:
>>
>>> master -> origin/master
>>> f13 -> origin/f13/master
>>> f12 -> origin/f12/master
>>
>> Please don't. The
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 18:35:22 +0200
Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Thu, 22.07.10 11:29, Simo Sorce (sso...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
> > > they hence would have needed to be started one after the other, so
> > > that every service using another services can be sure it can talk
> > > to the one it need
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/22/2010 02:16 AM, Hans Ulrich Niedermann wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 11:48 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
>> On 07/21/2010 01:55 AM, Hans Ulrich Niedermann wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2010-07-20 at 22:15 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
On 07/20/2010 08:
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 19:04:44 +0200
Lennart Poettering wrote:
> But also HTTP is a good candidate. When apache shuts down it closes
> the listening socket but will finish processing the requests it
> already began to process. Would apache use socket actviation like
> this it would hence be restart
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 20:40:53 +0200
Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Thu, 22.07.10 08:05, Simo Sorce (sso...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
> > > to make real; give reality to (a hope, fear, plan, etc.).
> > >
> > > but its seems quite an abstract term to associate reality with an
> > > abstract computer o
On 07/23/2010 12:10 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> Kay and I have discussed this now. We agreed to fold systemd-install
> into systemctl entirely, and replace --realize by --now. Also, we'll
> drop some of the options --realize had, and always imply that the init
> system configuration shall be re
ons 2010-07-21 klockan 09:30 -0800 skrev Jeff Spaleta:
> I'm not part of the zero regression fanclub. But I'd like to help do
> what is reasonable to minimize the frustration of introducing a new
> way of doing things. The deprecation warnings are reasonable to me. We
> aren't going to reduce that
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 08:40:53PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> I hope this simplification sounds good to many of you.
It does. Thanks.
--
Matthew Miller
Senior Systems Architect -- Instructional & Research Computing Services
Harvard School of Engineering & Applied Sciences
--
devel mail
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/22/2010 07:41 AM, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We are working on an Eclipse plug-in for Fedora Packagers, which
> provides tooling for RPM packaging for Fedora (without needing to
> resort to CLI). Since we are planning on supporting dist-gi
ons 2010-07-21 klockan 22:13 -0400 skrev Chuck Anderson:
> But for basics such as "chkconfig service on|off|--list", there should
> be compatibility.
Yes. I basically use:
chkconfig foo on
chkconfig foo off
env LC_ALL=C.UTF-8 chkconfig --list | fgrep :on |awk '{print $1}
The rest I don't real
On 07/23/2010 01:14 AM, Alexander Boström wrote:
> But the thing to remember: If systemd-install is too complicated to use,
> people will keep using chkconfig and service instead and ignore the
> warning. That's why it's important to have something that supports
> everything that systemd does while
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 10:37:20AM -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
[...]
> I'd wager that if we were having this discussion in a room with the
> very same people, I think the emotional reactions over the areas of
> conflict would be much reduced and personality quirk mismatches
> wouldn't cause so much
On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 12:52 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-07-17 at 13:36 +0200, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > F-13's NetworkManager is currently still at version
> > 0.8.1-0.1.git20100510.fc13, which on my Sony netbook intermittently
> > disconnects on some networks, an
Lennart Poettering wrote:
[...]
> Well, I think good UI means that you distuingish computer parsable and
> human readable tools. "status" is human readable. "show"/"check" are
> computer-parsable.
Mildly disagree. It is nice to be able to remember from people-use what the
output looks like when
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=617013
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=433803&action=diff
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=433803&action=edit
--
389-devel mailing list
389-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-dev
On 07/22/2010 06:37 PM, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> Personally, speaking as a person_and_ a sysadmin, it would be
> worthwhile to have a big freakin button somewhere that allowed me to
> disable all native systemd config files and let me run sysinit style
> files when the situation demands... ie crap
Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 21.07.10 20:13, Matthew Miller (mat...@mattdm.org) wrote:
>
> > It appears that you're looking at this from the point of view of chkconfig
> > as a tool which causes certain manipuations of the system to happen
> > (symlinks changed). That's the backwards appro
Mike McGrath wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Jul 2010, Colin Walters wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
> > > I think the bigger question is why are we doing this?
> >
> > There's some motivation here:
> > http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/systemd.html
> I was pretty clear in ev
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 01:29:03AM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> And btw, you can even create automount points via
> comment=systemd.automount as mount option in /etc/fstab. You don't even
> have to place an .automount file anywhere. For the API file systems
> however we decided to do just tha
On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 13:43 -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 13:07 -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > I messed up, and there's a bug in which python doesn't startup if
> > python-devel is not installed, which led to the majority of the "noarch"
> > builds failing. [
2010/7/22 "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" :
> I think it's time to re-inform everyone since they seemed to be so
> focused on systemd and have completely forgot about upstart.
>
> Nobody has said anything that upstart was being deprecated nobody!
That's not exactly what I'm talking about... though that's
Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 21.07.10 19:39, Mike McGrath (mmcgr...@redhat.com) wrote:
[...]
> > Who has been requesting this? What requirements did they give? The
> > problem people seem to be having is the reasons you give in the above
> > paragraph are reasons you yourself invented,
Looks, looks like gcc can do certain compile time bounds checking (probably
for ages but I'm slow) and emits warnings like:
In function 'strcpy',
inlined from 'New_psimage_Ctrl' at psimage.c:357:9:
/usr/include/bits/string3.h:107:3: warning: call to __builtin___strcpy_chk
will always overfl
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 03:12:46PM -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> Looks, looks like gcc can do certain compile time bounds checking (probably
> for ages but I'm slow) and emits warnings like:
>
> In function 'strcpy',
> inlined from 'New_psimage_Ctrl' at psimage.c:357:9:
> /usr/include/bits
I am sending this on behalf of Dave Lawrence and the bugzilla team at
Red Hat. Please forward this on to any appropriate lists that were
missed.
> Greetings,
>
> The Red Hat Bugzilla team is happy to announce the first public beta
> release of the next version of Red Hat Bugzilla based on the
>
Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Thu, 22.07.10 12:06, Dave Airlie (airl...@redhat.com) wrote:
[...]
> > Wow thats pretty special... both an option called realize and a
> > argument, that won't get confusing no matter how long it lives, also
> > realize doesn't seem to be conveying a useful meaning
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 12:17 PM, Horst H. von Brand
wrote:
> Great to know about that. And yes, it is extremely relevant for a sysadmin
> to know how to tickle the system so it spits out awk(1)-able logs and stuff.
Hmm... can these tools learn to prefer a certain format when they are
piped int
On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 17:37 -0400, Horst H. von Brand wrote:
> > however is very confusing when you'd write "disable --start" to disable
> > something and then have it stop...) We then considered "--now", because
> > it is not a verb.
>
> What is wrong with that? "enable --now" and "disable --now
On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 15:52 +0900, Mamoru Tasaka wrote:
> Jeff Spaleta wrote, at 07/22/2010 03:11 PM +9:00:
> > On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:00 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> >> - numpy is segfaulting during %check; am waiting on a gdb build to
> >> finish (linked against 2.7) before I debug; this block
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 15:39, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 12:17 PM, Horst H. von Brand
> wrote:
>> Great to know about that. And yes, it is extremely relevant for a sysadmin
>> to know how to tickle the system so it spits out awk(1)-able logs and stuff.
>
>
> Hmm... can these
On 07/23/2010 03:13 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 17:37 -0400, Horst H. von Brand wrote:
>> What do other commands use for "do it now" (instead of "later")? Perhaps
>> the ubiquitous "-f/--force" will do?
>>
> I think --now is fine. There's even precedent: the famous 'shut
Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Thu, 22.07.10 08:05, Simo Sorce (sso...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
> > > to make real; give reality to (a hope, fear, plan, etc.).
> > >
> > > but its seems quite an abstract term to associate reality with an
> > > abstract computer object.
> >
> > Dave, I am not a nat
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> I have seen this done with a couple of GNU tools in the past. The
> problems that usually stopped this was that too many strange consoles
> seem to be a pipe at somepoint and so it spits out the wrong format at
> the wrong time. It is
On Fri, 2010-07-23 at 03:18 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 07/23/2010 03:13 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 17:37 -0400, Horst H. von Brand wrote:
> >> What do other commands use for "do it now" (instead of "later")? Perhaps
> >> the ubiquitous "-f/--force" will do?
> >>
1 - 100 of 142 matches
Mail list logo
