* Olivier Crête schrieb am 06.01.12 um 03:15 Uhr:
> On Fri, 2012-01-06 at 08:44 +0800, Patrick Lauer wrote:
> > On 01/06/12 05:26, Olivier Crête wrote:
> > [snip]
> > > The only thing I see them sacrificing is loose coupling, they provide
> > > more functionality than any other init system, more co
On Fri, 2012-01-06 at 08:44 +0800, Patrick Lauer wrote:
> On 01/06/12 05:26, Olivier Crête wrote:
> [snip]
> > The only thing I see them sacrificing is loose coupling, they provide
> > more functionality than any other init system, more correctness
> > (seriously, did you ever read most init script
Hi,
On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 20:29 -0500, Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote:
> Negative effects of removing the /bin/systemd symlink on 2021-05-01: an
> unknown number of users who had forgotten to update their grub.conf will
> discover that they can no longer boot their systems.
>
> I would suggest not re
On Fri, 2012-01-06 at 00:52 +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
> 3) a symlink is installed at /bin/systemd to ensure that current init=
> specifications are still valid.
>
> Please note that these features will be removed after the transitional
> period and users upgrading afterwards will have to manually
On 6 January 2012 06:14, Patrick Lauer wrote:
> On 01/06/12 05:26, Olivier Crête wrote:
> [snip]
>> The only thing I see them sacrificing is loose coupling, they provide
>> more functionality than any other init system, more correctness
>> (seriously, did you ever read most init scripts out there?
On 01/06/12 05:26, Olivier Crête wrote:
[snip]
> The only thing I see them sacrificing is loose coupling, they provide
> more functionality than any other init system, more correctness
> (seriously, did you ever read most init scripts out there?), more well
> defined behavior (all systemd systems b
120106 Michał Górny wrote:
> I'm going to move systemd completely to /usr soonish
> and thus I'd like to submit the following news item for review.
> I'd appreciate any comments and suggestions.
> -- NEWS ITEM FOLLOWS --
...
> For this reason, a new revisions of all systemd versions have been
Hello,
I'm going to move systemd completely to /usr soonish and thus I'd like
to submit the following news item for review. I'd appreciate any
comments and suggestions.
-- NEWS ITEM FOLLOWS --
Title: systemd /usr migration
Author: Michał Górny
Content-Type: text/plain
Posted: 2012-01-06
Revisio
On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 08:08:44PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jan 2012 13:30:24 -0600
> William Hubbs wrote:
> > > Or will /etc move to /usr too?
> >
> > No, /etc isn't going anywhere.
>
> Are you sure? I heard a rumour that systemd will soon require you to
> put /etc inside your
Hello
No one from gnome team has time or is willing to keep maintaining
www-misc/gurlchecker
If anybody volunteers, it would be nice :)
Thanks a lot
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Thu, 5 Jan 2012 23:06:18 +0100
Michał Górny wrote:
> > I don't claim they're crazy. I claim they're sacrificing
> > functionality, correctness, loose coupling, simplicity, well defined
> > behaviour, understandability and stability in order to implement
> > questionable new shiny things.
>
> A
On Thu, 5 Jan 2012 21:09:35 +
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Thu, 05 Jan 2012 16:02:09 -0500
> Olivier Crête wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 20:08 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > On Thu, 5 Jan 2012 13:30:24 -0600
> > > William Hubbs wrote:
> > > > > Or will /etc move to /usr too?
> > > >
On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 21:09 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Thu, 05 Jan 2012 16:02:09 -0500
> Olivier Crête wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 20:08 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > On Thu, 5 Jan 2012 13:30:24 -0600
> > > William Hubbs wrote:
> > > > > Or will /etc move to /usr too?
> > > >
On Thu, 05 Jan 2012 16:02:09 -0500
Olivier Crête wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 20:08 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Thu, 5 Jan 2012 13:30:24 -0600
> > William Hubbs wrote:
> > > > Or will /etc move to /usr too?
> > >
> > > No, /etc isn't going anywhere.
> >
> > Are you sure? I heard a ru
On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 20:08 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jan 2012 13:30:24 -0600
> William Hubbs wrote:
> > > Or will /etc move to /usr too?
> >
> > No, /etc isn't going anywhere.
>
> Are you sure? I heard a rumour that systemd will soon require you to
> put /etc inside your initrd
On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 08:08:44PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > Or will /etc move to /usr too?
> >
> > No, /etc isn't going anywhere.
>
> Are you sure? I heard a rumour that systemd will soon require you to
> put /etc inside your initrd (since / can't be mounted without it).
> Obviously, y
On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 3:08 PM, Ciaran McCreesh
wrote:
> Are you sure? I heard a rumour that systemd will soon require you to
> put /etc inside your initrd (since / can't be mounted without it).
While I can't speak to your comments about being unable to restart
daemons with systemd (hope this isn
On Thu, 5 Jan 2012 13:30:24 -0600
William Hubbs wrote:
> > Or will /etc move to /usr too?
>
> No, /etc isn't going anywhere.
Are you sure? I heard a rumour that systemd will soon require you to
put /etc inside your initrd (since / can't be mounted without it).
Obviously, you'd have to reboot if
On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 07:27:49AM +1300, Kent Fredric wrote:
> 2012/1/5 Ulrich Mueller
> >
> > > On Wed, 4 Jan 2012, Michał Górny wrote:
> >>
> > There's really nothing pointless or blurry about this separation.
> > The FHS has a nice definition: "The contents of the root filesystem
> > must
On Thu, 5 Jan 2012 17:12:26 + (UTC)
Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> But init=/bin/sh (or /bin/bash as I use here) DOES help in a
> surprising number of cases as long as the necessary storage and input
> drivers and filesystem modules are builtin. And a lot of us have
> strong ideas abo
Olivier Crête posted on Thu, 05 Jan 2012 09:31:07 -0500 as excerpted:
> On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 12:08 +0100, Marc Schiffbauer wrote:
>>
>> I meant "hight-level" only in a way that it is not really needed to
>> boot the very basic things of a system so that I can get a root prompt
>> at the console
On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 01:59:54 +0200
Samuli Suominen wrote:
> # Samuli Suominen (23 Dec 2011)
> # Missing fltk-1.3 support and forced downgrade of fltk
> # in the same stabilization level which makes this gentoo-x86
> # incompatible package. Bug 395747. Removal in 30 days.
> media-radio/fldigi
>
On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 12:08 +0100, Marc Schiffbauer wrote:
>
> I meant "hight-level" only in a way that it is not really needed to
> boot the very basic things of a system so that I can get a root
> prompt at the console at least. E.g. you do not need dbus to find
> and mount the rootfs, fire a ge
On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 12:08 +0100, Marc Schiffbauer wrote:
>
> I meant "hight-level" only in a way that it is not really needed to
> boot the very basic things of a system so that I can get a root
> prompt at the console at least. E.g. you do not need dbus to find
> and mount the rootfs, fire a ge
* Michał Górny schrieb am 05.01.12 um 09:26 Uhr:
> On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 19:30:07 +0100
> Marc Schiffbauer wrote:
>
> > * Olivier Crête schrieb am 04.01.12 um 18:40 Uhr:
> > > On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 15:54 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 16:51:12 +0100
> > > > Michał Górny wr
On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 19:30:07 +0100
Marc Schiffbauer wrote:
> * Olivier Crête schrieb am 04.01.12 um 18:40 Uhr:
> > On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 15:54 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 16:51:12 +0100
> > > Michał Górny wrote:
> > > > /bin/systemctl
> > > > libdbus-1.so.3 => /
26 matches
Mail list logo
