On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 01:11:39PM -0800, Isaac Dunham wrote:
> I've just released libsysdev 0.1.0.
> Source code may be found at:
> https://github.com/idunham/libsysdev/archive/0.1.0.tar.gz
> (I'll have to tag releases using a different approach.)
>
> There's an initial port of xf86-input-evdev t
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 11:59:03AM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
> Devuan Weekly News XI posed the following question:
>
> ==
> Talking about something else, it seems that the list is becoming
> two-fold. On one hand, it becomes concentrated on development, w
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 08:55:07AM -0500, Gravis wrote:
> wow. congrats on being highly offensive on your very first post.
>
> anyway, i looked at Bastille and it's a highly tweaked script and
> headed toward being a decade out of date. frankly i'm not surprised
> it was dropped. Linux security
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 11:10:27AM -0700, Roy Nielsen wrote:
> I don't believe the task is impossible, I'm sure there are people
> working on such a tool and perhaps they will even open source it!
>
> Regards,
> -Roy
As an industry specialist dealing with security even as a non-infosec guy, I'm
c
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 01:59:48AM +, Isaac Dunham wrote:
> mdev is in busybox. I've managed to bring up my system with it, but
> when I tried starting X I couldn't get the keyboard working.
That's because by default X tries to hotplug input devices with evdev. And
evdev requires libudev.
Ther
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 06:10:40PM +0300, Jack L. Frost wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 01:59:48AM +, Isaac Dunham wrote:
> > mdev is in busybox. I've managed to bring up my system with it, but
> > when I tried starting X I couldn't get the keyboard working.
>
&
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 10:30:32AM +, Jaromil wrote:
> While I look forward to vdev's development, I think we should change as
> little as possible here, despite the fact we will keep some systemd code
> around for a little longer (but no systemd daemon running anyway).
Oh, I was not suggesti
> Could you please cease «kickass» here -- for people read your news
> also, but such rudness leaves them nothing but to shrink from your
> writing. Thanks again for the news though.
“kickass” is not even a swear word.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 03:12:54PM -0500, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> I think we're seeing cultural differences here. What may not be a
> swearword in one community may be in another.
The guy is east european and has a very loose grasp on the english language.
It's not a cultural difference, it's plai
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 09:25:00PM +0200, toto titi wrote:
> Hi Guys,
> and thank you to all of you for this fork.
> Do you plan to get rid of pulseaudio and avahi as well, or do you just
> focus on systemd ?
What are your problems with pulse being in the repos? It doesn't force
dependencies on it
> devuan is not about depoetterizing, it's about freedom of choice. Since
> systemd deprives user from his freedom to choose init system (and a lot of
> other subsystems) it has to go. For the rest devuan doesn't care - as long as
> it doesn't as well introduce conflicts with alternative package
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 08:03:02PM -0400, Jude Nelson wrote:
> Hey everyone,
>
> I have the latest news for vdev:
Hi. I dunno if it's very relevant to this particular mailing list, but still.
I've packaged vdev and all its dependencies for Arch:
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/vdev-git
https:
On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 06:33:34PM -0500, T.J. Duchene wrote:
> Has something happened with standard udev that you are looking to switch?
> I've not heard anything lately, but that does not make immediate sense to me.
>
I'm not the one you're asking, but I'll provide one reason to switch:
ude
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 03:33:06AM -0400, Jude Nelson wrote:
> I'm not a Slackware or Arch user, but please let me know if there's
> anything I can do to make packaging easier? I don't want to make things
> needlessly difficult :)
I've dropped an issue on github about the new Makefiles, yeah :)
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 12:20:00PM +, Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote:
> Doing work now because it "is sure to be needed at some point" is
> one of the major problems fixed by XP and agile development. Google
> for YAGNI. So why is it a good idea in this case?
I have not heard good arguments against pl
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 07:29:03PM +1000, yve...@tpg.com.au wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Could be some slackware joke but I noticed a folder named systemd
> within slack 14.1
Probably upstream units that came in with 'make install' when building the
package.
signature.asc
Description: Digital sig
On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 01:31:40AM -0400, Jude Nelson wrote:
> Hey everyone,
>
> I've just pushed my first stab at libudev-compat to the vdev repository.
> It took a while to work out how to remove the need for udev to send libudev
> clients device events, but I think I've figured out something th
On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 10:50:47AM -0400, Jude Nelson wrote:
> Yes. In fact, my goal for alpha is to be able to use libudev-compat in
> conjunction with vdev to run X.org without an xorg.conf.
Sweet. Manual X.Org config is a major showstopper for some people when it comes
to using something that
On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 10:48:35PM +0200, Anto wrote:
> I just purged all connman files that I downloaded tonight. I think t
> is not worth trying to compile and install it. The title of the
> commit below clearly says that connman is definitely being locked-in
> to systemd.
>
> machine: Integrate
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 09:18:14AM +0200, Anto wrote:
> For what I understood, that is not a hard dependency. I believe that
> commit would only have an affect if systemd-hostnamed is running.
Which is bad... how? I fail to understand how supporting systemd (vs depending
on it) is a bad thing. The
> That depends entirely on one's level of paranoia -- in this case, that
> the option of not using systemd may disappear with later releases.
You can always ask the dev for their plans regarding dependencies on systemd
instead of just instantly dropping the project :D
signature.asc
Description:
On Sat, Jul 04, 2015 at 10:40:42AM +0200, Fred DC wrote:
> So it is: libprocps4 depends on libsystemd0
To clarify:
That's a package dependency. That's procps being built with systemd support.
It's not procps hard-depending on systemd.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
vdev is currently not providing its own pkg-config file, so if you want to try
building evdev against it, you should take the .pc file from either systemd or
eudev.
On Sat, Sep 05, 2015 at 09:50:13AM -0400, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 05, 2015 at 03:39:17PM +0200, Teodoro Santoni wrote:
> >
On Sun, Nov 01, 2015 at 09:29:31AM +0100, sth wrote:
> posts like this are the reason I decided to switch to an existing
> distribution that doesn't use systemd rather than wait for Devuan.
Seriously? There are much worse posts on here, but you chose “top lel” as an
example?
signature.asc
Desc
On Sat, Nov 07, 2015 at 10:09:19PM +0100, aitor_czr wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I just started with fskip:
>
> http://gnuinos.org/vdev/
>
> It builds successfully, but after a installation i saw the following issue:
> all the /usr/lib/*.o files are missing !!
>
> Cheers,
>
>Aitor.
>
This is a welcome attitude to hold, given that you stick to it. Let's hope
this is a sign of maturity, not selective awareness.
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 10:30:47AM +0100, Florian Zieboll wrote:
>
> From LWN.net's Distribution quotes of the (last) week:
>
> You know, I am certainly not the person
On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 01:33:37PM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
> Arch is a virulently pro-systemd, anti-choice distro...
Counter-argument: https://fleshless.org/pages/spark.html
I have tried to do the same with debian and void, both were much more rigid
than Arch and fought me the whole way.
signa
On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 01:24:55PM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
> Yes, but unless he's flat out lying about what the former Redhat CEO
> said to him, Redhat is flat busted.
Which he might be doing. I would want some proof that was said, even though it
does align with everything RedHat does.
signatur
On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 09:27:08PM +0300, Jack L. Frost wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 01:24:55PM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
> > Yes, but unless he's flat out lying about what the former Redhat CEO
> > said to him, Redhat is flat busted.
>
> Which he might be doing. I
On Sun, Apr 03, 2016 at 08:17:32PM -0400, Boruch Baum wrote:
> Please consider setting the default /etc/fstab to include:
>
> proc/proc procdefaults,hidepid=2
>
> This has the effect of keeping the specific activities, process ids,
> command lines and parameters of a use
On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 02:32:27PM +0100, Rainer Weikusat wrote:
> NB: Just applying the init procedure to systemd based on the assumption
> that it will work like a well-behaved UNIX(*) program should is - how
> shall we say - a bit daring/ over-optimistic. There's presumably some
> kind of system
On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 04:54:32PM +0300, Jack L. Frost wrote:
>
> There should be no reaso systemd would not work like that. exec places it
> right
> at the top of the process tree. I'm now curious to test this. Will do later.
Just tested: after booting with /bin/bash a
On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 02:22:29PM +0900, Simon Walter wrote:
> Since Chung's new version is written in Python, wouldn't it be considered a
> different piece of software? I don't think a re-write in another language of
> something licensed under the MIT license can even be considered a
> derivative
On Sun, Aug 07, 2016 at 01:22:25PM -0400, Brian Nash wrote:
> I'm not sure on the specifics of the change, but for most scripted uses
> you would probably pass it the `-1` flag anyway.
>
> If it doesn't list one file per line anymore, that could be quite
> serious: we would need to use `dir` inste
34 matches
Mail list logo
