So the potteringisation continues...
Are we going to allow this sort of behaviour into Devuan??
Daniel
Forwarded Message
Subject: support for merged /usr in Debian
Resent-Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2015 00:52:09 + (UTC)
Resent-From: debian-de...@lists.debian.org
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2
On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 05:26:01PM -0600, Nate Bargmann wrote:
> * On 2015 31 Dec 14:53 -0600, Miles Fidelman wrote:
>
> > Can you say "kdbus?"
>
> That doesn't worry me much at this stage as unlike at the higher layers
> where SD support seems to result in support for certain other APIs being
>
Hi Emiliano,
On 12/31/2015 07:05 PM, Emiliano Marini wrote:
Please excuse me, I know many of you can see this like a good tribute for
Ian, but naming "Ian" to the first Devuan stable release could sound like
using his name for the cause, at least for some evil-minded people.
Nobody proposed n
On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 12:21:13PM -0300, Emiliano Marini wrote:
> Please excuse me, I know many of you can see this like a good tribute for
> Ian, but naming "Ian" to the first Devuan stable release could sound like
> using his name for the cause, at least for some evil-minded people.
Maybe my c
On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 10:51:47AM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
[cut]
>
> This is why I suggested that the other person (I can't find his name
> right now) consult me before writing docs or a presentation. Every
> single problem anyone could have about Windowmaker, I've had. If he can
> explain it t
On 01/01/16 02:51, Steve Litt wrote:
On Thu, 31 Dec 2015 10:03:40 +
This is why I suggested that the other person (I can't find his name
right now) consult me before writing docs or a presentation. Every
single problem anyone could have about Windowmaker, I've had. If he can
explain it to
Hi Adam,
El 28/12/15 a las 16:43, Adam Borowski escribió:
On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 11:16:17AM +0100, aitor_czr wrote:
>I propose a new package 'xfce4-default-settings' to customize the default
>appearance of the desktop in devuan. I also propose alsa-oss,
Note that xfce4 in unstable doesn't su
Children! Down that path lies madness.
- Nate
--
"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all
possible worlds. The pessimist fears this is true."
Ham radio, Linux, bikes, and more: http://www.n0nb.us
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.o
On 01/01/16 06:05, Simon Hobson wrote:
Mitt Green wrote:
I reckon as long as his Fedora boots, he doesn't care.
I think that's the key reason.
Linus is concerned with the kernel - and while I suspect he has personal preferences about what is
run on top of that, he's "detached" enough to tak
Hello list,
Is vdev already available somewhere as a package in ascii?
# apt-get install vdev
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
E: Unable to locate package vdev
Or do I need to get it from git?
# cat /etc/apt/sources.list
deb http://
Daniel Reurich writes:
> So the potteringisation continues...
If I remember well Solaris has /bin linked to /usr/bin since many years,
so linking /bin to /usr/bin is not a poetteringisation, or almost it's
not an original idea of poettering.
Ciao, Micky
--
The sysadmin has all the answers, exp
Hi,
I'm getting so closed to set up Devuan system.
Setup VirtualBox in Devuan
Find the header package of current kernel version of the system. ‘ uname
-a’ will show the version number of kernel image.
In my Devuan, the header pacakge is linux-headers-3.16.0-4-amd64
$ sudo aptitude install l
On Fri, 01 Jan 2016 15:45:49 +0100
Micky Del Favero wrote:
> Daniel Reurich writes:
>
> > So the potteringisation continues...
>
> If I remember well Solaris has /bin linked to /usr/bin since many
> years, so linking /bin to /usr/bin is not a poetteringisation, or
> almost it's not an origin
Hi all,
This idea came to me while I wrote an anti-merge rant a few minutes
ago...
You know, times have changed. Today, a 256GB SSD can be had for less
than $100, and can easily, trivially, hold the entire operating system.
One excellent configuration is to have the root partition, hosted by a
S
On Fri, 01 Jan 2016 15:45:49 +0100, Micky wrote in message
<868u498ijm@minnie.mesina.net>:
> Daniel Reurich writes:
>
> > So the potteringisation continues...
>
> If I remember well Solaris has /bin linked to /usr/bin since many
> years, so linking /bin to /usr/bin is not a poetteringisati
On Fri, Jan 01, 2016 at 12:26:41PM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
> If / is formatted ext4, it can be mounted directly by a kernel with ext4
> drivers, no initramfs needed.
Wasn't the original reason for having an initrd that the boot loader,
probably LILO at the time, couldn't handle a kernel image abo
Steve Litt wrote:
> This idea came to me while I wrote an anti-merge rant a few minutes
> ago...
I was going to reply to that, I'll reply here instead ...
First off, thanks for answering a question I hadn't asked but had always
wondered about the answer to. I "sort of" knew what initramfs was,
Steve Litt writes:
[...]
> If / is formatted ext4, it can be mounted directly by a kernel with ext4
> drivers, no initramfs needed.
The only reason why 'initramfs' is ever needed is because the kernel can
mount the 'real' root filesystem without loading a/ some additional
files first. This is a
John Rigg wrote:
> Wasn't the original reason for having an initrd that the boot loader,
> probably LILO at the time, couldn't handle a kernel image above a
> certain size?
I suspect you are thinking of the problem that it couldn't access sectors past
a certain point due to limitation in the BI
John Rigg writes:
> On Fri, Jan 01, 2016 at 12:26:41PM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
>> If / is formatted ext4, it can be mounted directly by a kernel with ext4
>> drivers, no initramfs needed.
>
> Wasn't the original reason for having an initrd that the boot loader,
> probably LILO at the time, couldn
Le 01/01/2016 18:07, Steve Litt a écrit :
On Fri, 01 Jan 2016 15:45:49 +0100
Micky Del Favero wrote:
Daniel Reurich writes:
So the potteringisation continues...
If I remember well Solaris has /bin linked to /usr/bin since many
years, so linking /bin to /usr/bin is not a poetteringisation,
On Fri, 01 Jan 2016 18:18:38 +
Rainer Weikusat wrote:
> For a real deployment, this is usually just humbug and can be replaced
> with a kernel containing the drivers necessary for mounting a root
> filesystem.
Plus the drivers for various hardware like cciss devices, just having
ext4 built i
richard lucassen writes:
> Rainer Weikusat wrote:
>
>> For a real deployment, this is usually just humbug and can be replaced
>> with a kernel containing the drivers necessary for mounting a root
>> filesystem.
>
> Plus the drivers for various hardware like cciss devices, just having
> ext4 built
On Fri, 1 Jan 2016 15:28:45 +0100
richard lucassen wrote:
Forget it. I overlooked the "readme" tab ;-)
> Hello list,
>
> Is vdev already available somewhere as a package in ascii?
>
> # apt-get install vdev
> Reading package lists... Done
> Building dependency tree
> Reading state infor
On Fri, 01 Jan 2016 18:42:08 +
Rainer Weikusat wrote:
> > Plus the drivers for various hardware like cciss devices, just
> > having ext4 built in is not enough. Wouldn't it be better to have a
> > simple initramfs with just the apropiate modules for the hardware?
>
> No computer I've either
On Fri, Jan 01, 2016 at 06:32:34PM +, Rainer Weikusat wrote:
> John Rigg writes:
> > On Fri, Jan 01, 2016 at 12:26:41PM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
> >> If / is formatted ext4, it can be mounted directly by a kernel with ext4
> >> drivers, no initramfs needed.
> >
> > Wasn't the original reason f
On Fri, 1 Jan 2016 18:46:05 +
John Rigg wrote:
> The 1024 cylinder boundary was why a separate /boot partition at the
> start of the disc became common, but still doesn't explain why an
> initrd.img became necessary. I used to know this stuff but it was a
> long time ago :-)
And after all I
richard lucassen writes:
> Rainer Weikusat wrote:
>> > Plus the drivers for various hardware like cciss devices, just
>> > having ext4 built in is not enough. Wouldn't it be better to have a
>> > simple initramfs with just the apropiate modules for the hardware?
>>
>> No computer I've either bee
On Fri, Jan 01, 2016 at 08:02:42PM +0100, richard lucassen wrote:
> And after all I would certainly not give up a seperate /boot fs. A
> separate /boot fs is very handy when running multi Linux system sharing
> the same /boot (e.g. in my case, the lilo.conf is there and is
> symlinked from all /etc
On Fri, 01 Jan 2016 19:05:24 +
Rainer Weikusat wrote:
> > Of course, but I presume that we're talking about a kernel that
> > will be distributed by Devuan. If you build in hardware drivers for
> > all different types of hardware, the kernel gets somewhat big
> > IMHO ;-)
>
> Some signals cr
Le 01/01/2016 20:05, Rainer Weikusat a écrit :
richard lucassen writes:
Rainer Weikusat wrote:
Plus the drivers for various hardware like cciss devices, just
having ext4 built in is not enough. Wouldn't it be better to have a
simple initramfs with just the apropiate modules for the hardware?
On Fri, 1 Jan 2016 20:23:21 +0100
richard lucassen wrote:
> Ok, I think we agree. But as OP said: it would be very nice to get rid
> of initramfs. But for a distribution kernel this would be almost
> undoable. So what about the idea to just have an initrd containing all
> necessary modules for mo
Didier Kryn writes:
> Le 01/01/2016 20:05, Rainer Weikusat a écrit :
>> richard lucassen writes:
>>> Rainer Weikusat wrote:
> Plus the drivers for various hardware like cciss devices, just
> having ext4 built in is not enough. Wouldn't it be better to have a
> simple initramfs with j
On Fri, 1 Jan 2016 20:48:13 +0100
richard lucassen wrote:
> And of course, as suggested by Didier, build in a few popular
> filesystems. In these cases an initrd can be omitted. That keeps
> things simple IMHO.
s/filesystems/hardware drivers/
--
Steve Litt writes:
> This *is* poetterization, regardless of what Sun or anyone else did
> before. It's supported by Freedesktop.org, and I think everyone here
> can agree that anything Freedesktop supports is anti-init choice,
> anti-simplicity, anti-modularity, and pro-systemd.
So anything fre
On 02/01/16 09:47, Micky Del Favero wrote:
> Steve Litt writes:
>
>> This *is* poetterization, regardless of what Sun or anyone else
>> did before. It's supported by Freedesktop.org, and I think everyone
>> here can agree that anything Freedesktop supports is anti-init
>> choice, anti-simplicity,
Daniel Reurich writes:
> No, rather freedesktop.org and Poettering are largely synonomous.
> Most of what is proposed there lately is mostly either from Poettering
> or his minions and a lot of what they propose is crap at best and
> destructive to the non-systemd ecosystem at worst.
ok, but "a
Quoting this with a useful subject.
Simon Wise wrote:
> I have been using dmenu for some time now ... with a couple of other tools
> that allow for a few tweaks to DEs to make them more comfortable for me, or
> indeed to set up kiosk style environments without any DE required at all.
> Use xbindke
On Fri, 1 Jan 2016 19:33:41 +0100
Didier Kryn wrote:
> Le 01/01/2016 18:07, Steve Litt a écrit :
> > On Fri, 01 Jan 2016 15:45:49 +0100
> > Micky Del Favero wrote:
> >
> >> Daniel Reurich writes:
> >>
> >>> So the potteringisation continues...
> >> If I remember well Solaris has /bin link
On Fri, 01 Jan 2016 21:47:57 +0100
Micky Del Favero wrote:
> Steve Litt writes:
>
> > This *is* poetterization, regardless of what Sun or anyone else did
> > before. It's supported by Freedesktop.org, and I think everyone here
> > can agree that anything Freedesktop supports is anti-init choice
On Fri, 01 Jan 2016 23:32:40 +0100
Micky Del Favero wrote:
> Daniel Reurich writes:
>
> > No, rather freedesktop.org and Poettering are largely synonomous.
> > Most of what is proposed there lately is mostly either from
> > Poettering or his minions and a lot of what they propose is crap at
> >
Regardless of who proposed it, merged /usr is still a reckless change that
needlessly complicates things.
The /usr and / split hasn't been perfectly followed, ever, but, still
achieves the goal of having a system that can be recovered from various
problems easily.
I should be able to substitute /
On 01/01/2016 03:06 AM, Daniel Reurich wrote:
> So the potteringisation continues...
>
> Are we going to allow this sort of behaviour into Devuan??
>
I have no say in the matter, but I do feel free to express my opinion
here. (-:
Devuan _is_, at least at this point, "Debian without systemd", and
43 matches
Mail list logo
