It seems to me that it is mostly sysadmins that are concerned about
systemd. That is understandable, they are the group of users that will
be most affected by the new paradigm, and will have to learn new
tricks.
Yet sysadmins are just a section of the Fedora users. For example,
people that like me
2010/8/23 Miloslav Trmač :
> If non-sysadmins will hardly notice the new init system, shouldn't the
> sysadmins, who will notice, be the primary consideration?
> Mirek
Not IMO. Sysadmins are just one group of stakeholders. My intervention
was just to put things in perspective.
However if a sysad
Over the last few days there seems to be a bit of existential angst
about Fedora. So here are my random thoughts.
About Fedora disappearing if Red Hat is bought by some evil
corporation, for example Microsoft. :-) I am not worried. As it has
been pointed out, all the Fedora packages as well as
On 29 August 2010 21:15, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Aug 2010 10:38:29 +0100
> Piscium wrote:
>
> Please do join in the design team and help them out:
>
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_Design_Team
>
While I appreciate the arts, I am not good at creating art, s
Some people like everything up-to-date, while others are more
conservative. Fine. Isn't there a middle ground?
Currently there are these repos: updates and updates_testing.
Maybe two more repos could be added: updates_fixes and updates_enhancements.
After a package stays for a while in updates_t
2010/9/19 Michał Piotrowski :
> Here is a workaround
> sudo rpm -e --nodeps upstart-sysvinit
> sudo yum install systemd-sysvinit
> sudo yum upgrade --skip-broken
>
I installed rawhide yesterday. I solved this issue with a different
method: "yum shell". Basically you enter the commands you need to
This question is addressed at those with kernel building experience.
The Fedora wiki has instructions on building a custom kernel:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/CustomKernel
That's good, thanks.
Let's say that someone would like to build a kernel with different
configuration options. He or
On 26 September 2010 09:25, Piscium wrote:
> My question is this: what should be the name of the configuration file
> for Intel 32 bits architecture?
> config-x86 or
> config-i386 or
> config-i686 or
> one of the above followed by "-generic"?
My custom kernel seems
On 6 October 2010 23:25, Adam Williamson wrote:
> This isn't generally how we do things. We encourage people to mark bugs
> as blockers; this constitutes *nominating* the bug as a blocker, it
> makes it pop up for review at a blocker review meeting. We then usually
> determine whether or not the
On 10 April 2011 20:01, Doug Ledford wrote:
> The bug I'm looking at right now is specifically against the live image, so
> no I can't test that with something in updates testing. It needs to make it
> to the base before it gets on the live media to see if it solves the problem
> there.
--
2012/3/5 Michał Piotrowski :
> So I grepped /etc for GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX.
> I found file:
> /etc/default/grub
>
> Why /etc/default dir is used instead of /etc/sysconfig? To be honest -
> it's not really user friendly from long time RH Linux user POV.
I run Grub2 from upstream and the file is /usr/
On 25 July 2010 07:34, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Greetings.
>
> first it seems that systemd-sysvinit needs to add a:
>
> Provides: sysvinit-userspace
>
> To avoid the current conflicts/upgrade problems:
>
> ---> Package upstart-sysvinit.x86_64 0:0.6.5-7.fc14 set to be installed
> --> Processing Conflic
On 20 April 2012 07:34, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> Originally we considered having three questions:
>
> * keep release naming the way it is.
> * Keep release names but change the process.
> * Discard release names altogether.
I would go for the third option. I dont' find Fedora or Ubuntu names
int
13 matches
Mail list logo
