You sound more and more like a troll.
John Hughes writes:
Having a few files and directories on your disk is a major
problem? systemd is not running if you're using systemd-shim, it
just needs the systemd directories
This is a classic fallacy. But each new file in /etc is one more file to
lo
John Hughes wrote:
> Yes, the impression I get around here is that this is a religious argument
> for most of you.
>
> I had hopes for Devuan, but the lack of rational thinking convinces me that
> it's going nowhere.
There's no lack of rational thinking.
People here don't want to run SystemD,
On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 02:40:08PM +0100, John Hughes wrote:
> >>No, you don't. You do have to have systemd installed, [ see below for
> >>why ], but systemd does not have to be pid 1.
> >
> >OK, systemd doesn't have to be pid1, but by your admission, you still have
> >to have it installed *even*
John Hughes writes:
> On 20/12/15 19:01, Rainer Weikusat wrote:
>> John Hughes writes:
>>> On 19/12/15 11:58, dev1fanboy wrote:
Gnome
If you need more: apt-cache rdepends libsystemd0 | wc -l
>>> We're going round in circles. *I* posted that command:
>>>
>>> https://lists.dyne.org/
On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 03:07:14PM +0100, John Hughes wrote:
[cut]
>
> I had hopes for Devuan, but the lack of rational thinking convinces
> me that it's going nowhere.
>
> Bye.
>
OK, bye now. And please everybody, just stop to answer to those
emails.
--
[ Enzo Nicosia aka KatolaZ --- GLUG
On 21/12/15 14:51, Rowland Penny wrote:
Exactly you moron.
Our friendly community.
Now I have said this before but you seem to be hard of hearing, so *GO
AWAY, YOU ARE PREACHING TO THE CONVERTED HERE!*
Yes, the impression I get around here is that this is a religious
argument for most
On 21/12/15 13:40, John Hughes wrote:
On 21/12/15 12:41, Rowland Penny wrote:
On 21/12/15 11:06, John Hughes wrote:
On 21/12/15 11:52, Rowland Penny wrote:
On 21/12/15 10:03, John Hughes wrote:
What I'm looking for is choice -- I want people who want systemd
to be able to run it, and peopl
On 21/12/15 12:41, Rowland Penny wrote:
On 21/12/15 11:06, John Hughes wrote:
On 21/12/15 11:52, Rowland Penny wrote:
On 21/12/15 10:03, John Hughes wrote:
What I'm looking for is choice -- I want people who want systemd to
be able to run it, and people who dont want it to be able to use
s
On 21/12/15 11:06, John Hughes wrote:
On 21/12/15 11:52, Rowland Penny wrote:
On 21/12/15 10:03, John Hughes wrote:
What I'm looking for is choice -- I want people who want systemd to
be able to run it, and people who dont want it to be able to use
sysvinit, openrc or upstart or whatever.
Am Montag, 21. Dezember 2015 schrieb John Hughes:
> On 21/12/15 11:52, Rowland Penny wrote:
> > On 21/12/15 10:03, John Hughes wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> What I'm looking for is choice -- I want people who want systemd to
> >> be able to run it, and people who dont want it to be able to use
> >> sysvi
Le 21/12/2015 11:03, John Hughes a écrit :
What I'm looking for is choice -- I want people who want systemd to be
able to run it, and people who dont want it to be able to use
sysvinit, openrc or upstart or whatever.
Please stop this. This question has been answered a million times
alread
On 12/21/2015 11:03 AM, John Hughes wrote:
At the moment things are all fucked up because there is no long term
alternative to the seat management part of systemd and few people seem
prepared to work on it.
Utterly false claim...systemd is responsible for broken things.
---
1) TRIOS
[d
On 21/12/15 11:52, Rowland Penny wrote:
On 21/12/15 10:03, John Hughes wrote:
What I'm looking for is choice -- I want people who want systemd to
be able to run it, and people who dont want it to be able to use
sysvinit, openrc or upstart or whatever. At the moment things are
all fucked up
On 21/12/15 10:03, John Hughes wrote:
On 20/12/15 19:01, Rainer Weikusat wrote:
John Hughes writes:
On 19/12/15 11:58, dev1fanboy wrote:
Gnome
If you need more: apt-cache rdepends libsystemd0 | wc -l
We're going round in circles. *I* posted that command:
https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/mess
On 20/12/15 19:01, Rainer Weikusat wrote:
John Hughes writes:
On 19/12/15 11:58, dev1fanboy wrote:
Gnome
If you need more: apt-cache rdepends libsystemd0 | wc -l
We're going round in circles. *I* posted that command:
https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/message/20151218.143549.77d859b4.en.html
B
John Hughes writes:
> On 19/12/15 11:58, dev1fanboy wrote:
>> Gnome
>>
>> If you need more: apt-cache rdepends libsystemd0 | wc -l
>
> We're going round in circles. *I* posted that command:
>
> https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/message/20151218.143549.77d859b4.en.html
>
> But you still haven't said *
On Sat, 2015-12-19 at 12:02 +0100, John Hughes wrote:
> On 19/12/15 11:58, dev1fanboy wrote:
> > Gnome
> >
> > If you need more: apt-cache rdepends libsystemd0 | wc -l
> We're going round in circles. *I* posted that command:
>
> https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/message/20151218.143549.77d859b4.en
It still answers your question, and you haven't responded to what I
said about gnome.
In the previous response you didn't reply to what I said about Devuan
not being *just* about systemd either.
I think you misunderstand me, I don't want to remove any part of
systemd. Can you show what I sai
On 19/12/15 11:02, John Hughes wrote:
On 19/12/15 11:58, dev1fanboy wrote:
Gnome
If you need more: apt-cache rdepends libsystemd0 | wc -l
We're going round in circles. *I* posted that command:
https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/message/20151218.143549.77d859b4.en.html
But you still haven't said
On 19/12/15 11:58, dev1fanboy wrote:
Gnome
If you need more: apt-cache rdepends libsystemd0 | wc -l
We're going round in circles. *I* posted that command:
https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/message/20151218.143549.77d859b4.en.html
But you still haven't said *why* you want to remove libsystemd0.
Gnome
If you need more: apt-cache rdepends libsystemd0 | wc -l
On Saturday, December 19, 2015 10:45 AM, John Hughes
wrote:
On 19/12/15 11:40, dev1fanboy wrote:
You have to avoid many other packages to avoid systemd and in some
cases you will end up with systemd support that you don't
On 19/12/15 11:40, dev1fanboy wrote:
You have to avoid many other packages to avoid systemd and in some
cases you will end up with systemd support that you don't want anyway.
For example?
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglist
Reading from devuan.org Devuan intends in the long term to try to
follow the UNIX philosophy of doing one thing and doing it well, so
it's not just about systemd.
You have to avoid many other packages to avoid systemd and in some
cases you will end up with systemd support that you don't want a
On 18/12/15 19:02, Steve Litt wrote:
Yeah, in an ideal world, we'd like to remove every rotting vestige of
systemd, but in a practical world, where if we don't timely produce
something people can actually use, this has all been for naught,
removal is a process, where on the first go-around we rem
On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 18:51:02 +0300
Mitt Green wrote:
> >is nothing but "systemd support code added to some
> >package".
>
> If it is so, why there is so much hype about it?
> I previously thought that Devuan aim was to remove
> *any* of systemd components.
I think this is settled law, settl
25 matches
Mail list logo