* On 2015 24 Feb 09:16 -0600, Rob Owens wrote:
> After some debate, that last dependency was changed to
> systemd-shim | systemd-sysv. That it required any debate at all
> makes me wonder where some of the Debian devs' heads are at.
It makes me wonder if the idea of installing anew rather than
> From: Rob Owens
> To: dng@lists.dyne.org
>
> - Original Message -
>
> > From: "T.J. Duchene"
> >
> >
> >
> > Gnome already depends on systemd, but the apps do not.
>
> Not exactly true. My eyes were open to the systemd problem when I
> installed brasero on Jessie and it wanted
- Original Message -
> From: "T.J. Duchene"
>
> Gnome already depends on systemd, but the apps do not.
Not exactly true. My eyes were open to the systemd problem when I
installed brasero on Jessie and it wanted to change my init system.
Brasero depends on gvfs to detect removable med
On Mon, 23 Feb 2015 22:33:28 +
Noel Torres wrote:
> On Saturday, 21 de February de 2015 18:52:22 Nate Bargmann escribió:
> > * On 2015 20 Feb 11:56 -0600, Steve Litt wrote:
> > > On Fri, 20 Feb 2015 08:59:33 -0800
> > >
> > > Go Linux wrote:
> > > > We all knew this was coming . . .
> > > >
> Please note that I'm not defending systemd. I just explai why KDE
movement is logical.
Sorry, I should have been clearer. My mini-rant was aimed at KDE.
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 8:37 PM, Noel Torres wrote:
> On Monday, 23 de February de 2015 23:39:19 Jude Nelson escribió:
> > > Why not? If I
On Monday, 23 de February de 2015 23:39:19 Jude Nelson escribió:
> > Why not? If I were a developer and I had a library or service doing part
>
> of my
>
> > work, I would link to it and delete duplicated code on my side.
>
> If logind could be run fully independently from systemd, I don't think
> Why not? If I were a developer and I had a library or service doing part
of my
> work, I would link to it and delete duplicated code on my side.
If logind could be run fully independently from systemd, I don't think
there would be as much of a controversy.
This is why I don't really buy the exp
On Saturday, 21 de February de 2015 18:52:22 Nate Bargmann escribió:
> * On 2015 20 Feb 11:56 -0600, Steve Litt wrote:
> > On Fri, 20 Feb 2015 08:59:33 -0800
> >
> > Go Linux wrote:
> > > We all knew this was coming . . .
> > >
> > > KDE Will Depend on 'logind' and 'timedated' in 6 Months
> > >
On Sun, 22 Feb 2015 16:50:05 -0600
"T.J. Duchene" wrote:
> This was inevitable and expected. I'm not trying to be an "I told you
> so" but I have mentioned this is a likely scenario before now. It's
> not the end of the universe, however.
LOL, for the first time in history, T.J. and I agree on
Le 21/02/2015 19:52, Nate Bargmann a écrit :
Imagine the chaos if the maintainers of the
C library behaved in a like manner (okay, we'd have Python, but I
digress;-)
Let's hope GNU will keep away from systemd! Imagine GCC, LaTeX or
Emacs depending on it >:o
By the way, I read in th
* On 2015 20 Feb 11:56 -0600, Steve Litt wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Feb 2015 08:59:33 -0800
> Go Linux wrote:
>
> > We all knew this was coming . . .
> >
> > KDE Will Depend on 'logind' and 'timedated' in 6 Months
> >
> > https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=15/02/20/101235
Following on here since
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 5:47 PM, Steve Litt wrote:
> They were
> specialists in monolithic entanglement when Lennart was in diapers.
i'd say any Behemoth DE does that and, like some else said, systemd
doing it is just the latest (and most blatant) example of this.
Cheers,
Nuno
__
On Fri, 20 Feb 2015 08:59:33 -0800
Go Linux wrote:
> We all knew this was coming . . .
>
> KDE Will Depend on 'logind' and 'timedated' in 6 Months
>
> https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=15/02/20/101235
This is precisely what I'd expect from the KDE project. They were
specialists in monolit
13 matches
Mail list logo
