seems to be a cordial 'heads up'. i would just respond with 'thanks for the
info'.
On August 3, 2016 7:06:10 PM CDT, Daniel Reurich
wrote:
::So should we respond by saying that "We don't use or encourage the use
::of systemd-shim in Devuan. Our approach is to rebuild the packages
::which in
On Thu, 4 Aug 2016 12:06:10 +1200, Daniel wrote in message
<57a286f2.5070...@centurion.net.nz>:
> So should we respond by saying that "We don't use or encourage the use
> of systemd-shim in Devuan. Our approach is to rebuild the packages
> which in debian depend on systemd, without that dependen
On 04.08.2016 02:06, Daniel Reurich wrote:
> So should we respond by saying that "We don't use or encourage the use
> of systemd-shim in Devuan. Our approach is to rebuild the packages
> which in debian depend on systemd, without that dependency instead."
Maybe also add:
"systemd-shim is only an
So should we respond by saying that "We don't use or encourage the use
of systemd-shim in Devuan. Our approach is to rebuild the packages
which in debian depend on systemd, without that dependency instead."
Regards,
Daniel.
On 04/08/16 09:12, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote:
>
Forwarded Message
Subject: Bug#832508: O: systemd-shim -- SysVinit shim for systemd
Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2016 09:12:02 +
Resent-From: Martin Pitt
Resent-To: debian-bugs-d...@lists.debian.org
Resent-CC: debian-de...@lists.debian.org, w...@debian.org
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 20
