On Mon, 9 Jun 2014 18:43:04 +
Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> Hello, Rick, thanks for the reply.
>
> [... cut all the emerge output, quotes and text in between ...]
>
> What the heck is going on, when a package management system can't even
> make a decision on which version of perl to use, and stic
Hello, Rick, thanks for the reply.
On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 12:18:41PM -0400, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
> On 06/09/2014 11:34 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> > I do this:
> > emerge --unmerge upower
> > emerge -1vp sys-power/upower-pm-utils
> > , and I still get portage threatening to
On 06/09/2014 06:34 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 05:11:32PM +0200, Silvio Siefke wrote:
>> On Tue, 3 Jun 2014 09:29:35 -0500 Canek Peláez Valdés
>> wrote:
>>> If I understood correctly, you need to:
>>> emerge -C sys-power/upower
>>> emerge -1v sys-power/upower-pm-utils
>>>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/09/2014 11:34 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 05:11:32PM +0200, Silvio Siefke wrote:
>> On Tue, 3 Jun 2014 09:29:35 -0500 Canek Peláez Valdés
>> wrote:
>
>>> If I understood correctly, you need to:
>
>>> emerge -C sys-power
On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 05:11:32PM +0200, Silvio Siefke wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Jun 2014 09:29:35 -0500 Canek Peláez Valdés
> wrote:
> > If I understood correctly, you need to:
> > emerge -C sys-power/upower
> > emerge -1v sys-power/upower-pm-utils
> > and then update world as usual.
> Yes is corre
On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Tanstaafl wrote:
>
> First question: is there a decent guide to installing a gentoo system from
> scratch using systemd as the init system?
I've done this a few times on VMs. Just follow the handbook, but skip
steps about configuring hostname/timezone/locale/etc s
On 6/4/2014 9:47 AM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
You seem to think the Upower devs simply decided to use systemd instead
of doing it themselves. In fact, they were always using code, from either
systemd or pm-utils. The fact that development stopped on pm-utils is
neither the fault of the Upower or sys
On 06/05/2014 11:40 AM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jun 2014 16:15:11 +0200
> "Dutch Ingraham" wrote:
>
>> If you could point me to the proper command set to make the switch,
>> I'd appreciate it.
>
> Remove the overlay (`layman -d mate`) and then do a world upgrade.
>
> It is as simple as t
On Thursday 05 Jun 2014 15:15:11 Dutch Ingraham wrote:
>
>
>
>
> If you could point me to the proper command set
> to make the switch, I'd appreciate it.
>
>
Please see if you can switch off HTML when posting to this list.
Check man layman, the delete command is:
layman -d
--
Rega
On Thu, 5 Jun 2014 16:15:11 +0200
"Dutch Ingraham" wrote:
> If you could point me to the proper command set to make the switch,
> I'd appreciate it.
Remove the overlay (`layman -d mate`) and then do a world upgrade.
It is as simple as that, as it'll upgrade all those packages to the
versions th
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2014 at 8:31 AM
From: "Tom Wijsman"
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Systemd upower
On Thu, 05 Jun 2014 08:11:31 -0400
Dutch Ingraham wrote:
> [nomerge ] mate-base/mate-1.6.0::mate-overlay
You are still using the MATE o
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2014 at 8:18 AM
From: "Samuli Suominen"
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Systemd upower
On 05/06/14 15:17, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
> On 06/05/2014 08:00 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
>> On 05/06/14 14:39, Dutch Ingraham
On Thu, 05 Jun 2014 08:11:31 -0400
Dutch Ingraham wrote:
> [nomerge ] mate-base/mate-1.6.0::mate-overlay
You are still using the MATE overlay, which wasn't synced up with
the latest changes; make layman sync, but if you want to be really sure
just remove the overlay from layman and use MAT
On 05/06/14 15:17, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
> On 06/05/2014 08:00 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
>> On 05/06/14 14:39, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
>>> On 06/04/2014 08:02 PM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
Gentoo doesn't have write access to ::mate-overlay, it's completely
unofficial
Gentoo developers a
On 06/05/2014 08:00 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
>
> On 05/06/14 14:39, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
>> On 06/04/2014 08:02 PM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
>>> Gentoo doesn't have write access to ::mate-overlay, it's completely
>>> unofficial
>>> Gentoo developers are just as much users as you are for ::mate-ov
On 06/05/2014 05:40 AM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Jun 2014 19:15:22 -0400
> Dutch Ingraham wrote:
>
>> Thanks everybody for your help. I've made the further suggested
>> changes, but I remain with the three hard blocks.
>
> Can you provide the emerge output of the following command?
>
>
On 05/06/14 14:39, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
> On 06/04/2014 08:02 PM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
>> Gentoo doesn't have write access to ::mate-overlay, it's completely
>> unofficial
>> Gentoo developers are just as much users as you are for ::mate-overlay
>>
>> Enough said
>>
>> - Samuli
>>
>>
> Sorry, b
On 06/04/2014 08:02 PM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
>
> On 05/06/14 02:15, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
>> On 06/04/2014 03:17 PM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
>>> On 04/06/14 20:11, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
On 06/04/2014 07:22 AM, Daniel Troeder wrote:
> Am 04.06.2014 06:05, schrieb Samuli Suominen:
>> O
On 05/06/14 14:11, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 2:34 AM, Greg Woodbury wrote:
>> Unfortunately, the advocates and implementers made some major political
>> choices when they (apparently deliberately) chose to put the systemd
>> stuff in /usr/lib instead of /lib. It was pointed ou
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 2:34 AM, Greg Woodbury wrote:
> Unfortunately, the advocates and implementers made some major political
> choices when they (apparently deliberately) chose to put the systemd
> stuff in /usr/lib instead of /lib. It was pointed out that this
> abrogated certain parts of the
On Thu, 05 Jun 2014 02:34:49 -0400
Greg Woodbury wrote:
> On 06/04/2014 11:11 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> It is a discussion about technological things, yes, but the art of
> dealing with other people *is* politics [1].
Politics are also about dealing with power, not alone people; it is
pos
On Thu, 5 Jun 2014 00:27:28 +0100
Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Jun 2014 19:15:22 -0400, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
>
> > I suppose its now time for an uninstall. Kind of disappointing; we
> > are told Gentoo is about choices, and in fact that's true. I made
> > the choice to use a pure openRC
On Wed, 04 Jun 2014 19:15:22 -0400
Dutch Ingraham wrote:
> Thanks everybody for your help. I've made the further suggested
> changes, but I remain with the three hard blocks.
Can you provide the emerge output of the following command?
emerge --tree --unordered-diplay -uDNv @world
This mak
On 06/04/2014 11:11 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 5:28 AM, Greg Woodbury wrote:
>> To see this as only freedom for the developer is part of an attitude
>> shift over the years that only lessens the overall usefulness of Linux
>> and FOSS. It does, in fact, push quite a f
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 8:46 PM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
>
> On 05/06/14 03:22, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
>> This effected stable tree of Gentoo as well, pulling undesired
>> different layout into stable is something that should have been
>> avoided. It is about time we split the profiles, systemd is not
On 05/06/14 03:22, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> This effected stable tree of Gentoo as well, pulling undesired
> different layout into stable is something that should have been
> avoided. It is about time we split the profiles, systemd is not option
> for people who runs openrc.
Indeed, I support the i
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 3:07 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
>
> On 05/06/14 02:25, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 2:15 AM, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
>>> On 06/04/2014 03:17 PM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
On 04/06/14 20:11, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
> On 06/04/2014 07:22 AM, Daniel Troeder
On 05/06/14 02:25, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 2:15 AM, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
>> On 06/04/2014 03:17 PM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
>>> On 04/06/14 20:11, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
On 06/04/2014 07:22 AM, Daniel Troeder wrote:
> Am 04.06.2014 06:05, schrieb Samuli Suominen:
On 05/06/14 02:15, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
> On 06/04/2014 03:17 PM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
>> On 04/06/14 20:11, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
>>> On 06/04/2014 07:22 AM, Daniel Troeder wrote:
Am 04.06.2014 06:05, schrieb Samuli Suominen:
> On 04/06/14 05:17, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
>> No, "sys-
On Wed, 04 Jun 2014 19:15:22 -0400, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
> I suppose its now time for an uninstall. Kind of disappointing; we are
> told Gentoo is about choices, and in fact that's true. I made the
> choice to use a pure openRC system. The last 7 hours of free time,
> though, was spent trying,
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 2:15 AM, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
> On 06/04/2014 03:17 PM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
>>
>> On 04/06/14 20:11, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
>>> On 06/04/2014 07:22 AM, Daniel Troeder wrote:
Am 04.06.2014 06:05, schrieb Samuli Suominen:
> On 04/06/14 05:17, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
On 06/04/2014 03:17 PM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
>
> On 04/06/14 20:11, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
>> On 06/04/2014 07:22 AM, Daniel Troeder wrote:
>>> Am 04.06.2014 06:05, schrieb Samuli Suominen:
On 04/06/14 05:17, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
> No, "sys-fs/udev" is not masked, but an update is indic
On 04/06/14 20:11, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
> On 06/04/2014 07:22 AM, Daniel Troeder wrote:
>> Am 04.06.2014 06:05, schrieb Samuli Suominen:
>>> On 04/06/14 05:17, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
No, "sys-fs/udev" is not masked, but an update is indicated in the
emerge above. That's a good catch, th
On Wednesday 04 June 2014 20:28:22 Marc Joliet wrote:
> I'm grateful! In fact, since I have this opportunity: thank you and all the
> other devs for your hard work, and for withstanding insufferable users :) .
[AOL]
Me too.
[/AOL]
--
Regards
Peter
Am Wed, 04 Jun 2014 16:08:02 +0300
schrieb Samuli Suominen :
[...]
> So yeah, only working with what upstreams provide as a distribution
> maintainer/packager, and people shouldn't try to dump this somehow on
> me. Fact that
> they have some fallback, like upower-pm-utils at all, is something they
On 06/04/2014 07:22 AM, Daniel Troeder wrote:
> Am 04.06.2014 06:05, schrieb Samuli Suominen:
>>
>> On 04/06/14 05:17, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
>>> No, "sys-fs/udev" is not masked, but an update is indicated in the
>>> emerge above. That's a good catch, the MATE stuff is from the overlay.
>>> Unfort
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 7:21 AM, Tanstaafl wrote:
> On 6/3/2014 1:08 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
[ ... ]
>> Who is "forcing" anything?
>
>
> I was specifically referring to your comment that:
>
>> The thing is, this is going to keep happening, as more and more
>> infrastructure migrates toward
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 5:28 AM, Greg Woodbury wrote:
> On 06/03/2014 10:05 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 8:37 PM, Greg Woodbury wrote:
>
>>
>>> Sure, systemd is a more elegant solution than the patchworks that have
>>> been applied several times to the original SysV con
On 04/06/14 16:47, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Jun 2014 08:21:51 -0400, Tanstaafl wrote:
>
>> And yes, as devs get lazier (decide to rely on systemd rather than
>> build it to work independently of the init system),
> Reusing existing, proven code is not laziness, it is efficiency. Yes,
> th
On Wed, 04 Jun 2014 08:21:51 -0400, Tanstaafl wrote:
> And yes, as devs get lazier (decide to rely on systemd rather than
> build it to work independently of the init system),
Reusing existing, proven code is not laziness, it is efficiency. Yes,
they could code their own version, but all the time
On 04/06/14 15:58, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 8:21 AM, Tanstaafl wrote:
>> And yes, as devs get lazier (decide to rely on systemd rather than build it
>> to work independently of the init system), this will in fact result in
>> *users* (read: those lacking the skills to code eve
On 04/06/14 15:21, Tanstaafl wrote:
> On 6/3/2014 1:08 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 11:48 AM, Tanstaafl
>> wrote:
>>> On 6/3/2014 11:10 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
Maybe. The thing is, this is going to keep happening, as more and more
infrastructure migr
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 8:21 AM, Tanstaafl wrote:
> And yes, as devs get lazier (decide to rely on systemd rather than build it
> to work independently of the init system), this will in fact result in
> *users* (read: those lacking the skills to code every program out there to
> work without system
On 04/06/14 15:15, Daniel Troeder wrote:
> Am 04.06.2014 13:22, schrieb Daniel Troeder:
>> Am 04.06.2014 06:05, schrieb Samuli Suominen:
>>> On 04/06/14 05:17, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
No, "sys-fs/udev" is not masked, but an update is indicated in the
emerge above. That's a good catch, the
On Tue, 03 Jun 2014 22:17:21 -0400
Dutch Ingraham wrote:
> That's a good catch, the MATE stuff is from the overlay.
MATE 1.6 is stable in the Portage tree, MATE 1.8 is testing in the
Portage tree; both had their upower dependencies fixed up days ago.
--
With kind regards,
Tom Wijsman (TomWij)
On 6/3/2014 1:08 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 11:48 AM, Tanstaafl wrote:
On 6/3/2014 11:10 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
Maybe. The thing is, this is going to keep happening, as more and more
infrastructure migrates towards systemd. Perhaps a news item everytime
it
Am 04.06.2014 13:22, schrieb Daniel Troeder:
> Am 04.06.2014 06:05, schrieb Samuli Suominen:
>>
>> On 04/06/14 05:17, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
>>> No, "sys-fs/udev" is not masked, but an update is indicated in the
>>> emerge above. That's a good catch, the MATE stuff is from the overlay.
>>> Unfortu
Am 04.06.2014 06:05, schrieb Samuli Suominen:
>
> On 04/06/14 05:17, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
>> No, "sys-fs/udev" is not masked, but an update is indicated in the
>> emerge above. That's a good catch, the MATE stuff is from the overlay.
>> Unfortunately, the xfce stuff is not, so even if the overl
On 06/03/2014 10:05 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 8:37 PM, Greg Woodbury wrote:
>
>> Sure, systemd is a more elegant solution than the patchworks that have
>> been applied several times to the original SysV concept.
>
> Glad to see you recognize that.
>
>> However, th
On 04/06/14 05:17, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
> No, "sys-fs/udev" is not masked, but an update is indicated in the
> emerge above. That's a good catch, the MATE stuff is from the overlay.
> Unfortunately, the xfce stuff is not, so even if the overlay currency
> was an issue, I'll still be showing som
On 04/06/14 02:13, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
>> systemd should not be visible at any time, nor its implications.
> Nobody is here to deal with other people's OCD.
>
>
+1
your assesment in this threads seems to be accurate otherwise too, I'm
glad not everyone has
lost their mind over _a word_ li
On 06/03/2014 09:57 PM, Michael Cook wrote:
> On 06/03/2014 09:48 PM, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
>> On 06/03/2014 09:08 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 7:58 PM, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
On 06/03/2014 07:24 PM, Jim Burwell wrote:
> FWIW, on my system, I had to mask
>
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 8:48 PM, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
> On 06/03/2014 09:08 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 7:58 PM, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
>>> On 06/03/2014 07:24 PM, Jim Burwell wrote:
>>>
FWIW, on my system, I had to mask "sys-apps/gentoo-systemd-integration"
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 8:37 PM, Greg Woodbury wrote:
> On 06/03/2014 01:08 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
>> Who is "forcing" anything? pm-utils has been unmaintained FOR FIVE
>> YEARS. Any project that decides to stop using it is making just the
>> right decision; UPower just did the correct thi
On 06/03/2014 09:48 PM, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
On 06/03/2014 09:08 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 7:58 PM, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
On 06/03/2014 07:24 PM, Jim Burwell wrote:
FWIW, on my system, I had to mask "sys-apps/gentoo-systemd-integration"
for it to merge the udev u
On 06/03/2014 09:08 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 7:58 PM, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
>> On 06/03/2014 07:24 PM, Jim Burwell wrote:
>>
>>> FWIW, on my system, I had to mask "sys-apps/gentoo-systemd-integration"
>>> for it to merge the udev update w/o trying to pull in systemd,
On 06/03/2014 01:08 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> Who is "forcing" anything? pm-utils has been unmaintained FOR FIVE
> YEARS. Any project that decides to stop using it is making just the
> right decision; UPower just did the correct thing. And systemd had
> *nothing* to do with it, except for p
On 06/03/2014 11:14 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
>
> On 03/06/14 18:10, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
>>> Maybe a news item explaining the switch of upower would help those who
>>> haven't
>>> blundered into this yet.
>> Maybe. The thing is, this is going to keep happening, as more and more
>> infrast
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 7:58 PM, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
> On 06/03/2014 07:24 PM, Jim Burwell wrote:
>
>> FWIW, on my system, I had to mask "sys-apps/gentoo-systemd-integration"
>> for it to merge the udev update w/o trying to pull in systemd, et al. i
>> didn't deep dive on what was trying to pull
On 06/03/2014 07:24 PM, Jim Burwell wrote:
> FWIW, on my system, I had to mask "sys-apps/gentoo-systemd-integration"
> for it to merge the udev update w/o trying to pull in systemd, et al. i
> didn't deep dive on what was trying to pull that in, but masking it
> (plus a ton of other stuff I have
On Wed, 4 Jun 2014 01:06:52 +0300
Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> Once again, you do not understand the claim.
>
> If a user of Gentoo chooses to use non systemd profile, it means that
> we need to make sure systemd will not be a valid option, ever.
There is no such thing as a "non systemd profile" on Ge
On 6/3/2014 16:13, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 5:06 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:59 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 4:40 PM, Alan McKinnon
>>> wrote:
>>> [...]
Incidentally, what exactly is wrong with systemd wri
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 6:07 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On 04/06/2014 00:59, Neil Bothwick wrote:
>> On Tue, 03 Jun 2014 23:01:20 +0200, Marc Stürmer wrote:
>>
>>> Even Linus Torvalds himself ranted about the attitude of systemd's
>>> developers at the beginning of May this year.
>>
>> Linus rants
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 5:06 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:59 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 4:40 PM, Alan McKinnon
>> wrote:
>> [...]
>> > Incidentally, what exactly is wrong with systemd writing a dhcp server &
>> > client, and an ntp client?
On 04/06/2014 00:59, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Tue, 03 Jun 2014 23:01:20 +0200, Marc Stürmer wrote:
>
>> Even Linus Torvalds himself ranted about the attitude of systemd's
>> developers at the beginning of May this year.
>
> Linus rants about everything and everyone, usually at least twice, once
On 04/06/2014 00:06, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:59 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 4:40 PM, Alan McKinnon
>> wrote:
>> [...]
>>> Incidentally, what exactly is wrong with systemd writing a dhcp server &
>>> client, and an ntp client? Is that projec
On Tue, 03 Jun 2014 23:01:20 +0200, Marc Stürmer wrote:
> Even Linus Torvalds himself ranted about the attitude of systemd's
> developers at the beginning of May this year.
Linus rants about everything and everyone, usually at least twice, once
for and once against. It proves nothing beyond Linu
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:59 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 4:40 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> [...]
> > Incidentally, what exactly is wrong with systemd writing a dhcp server &
> > client, and an ntp client? Is that project prohibited from writing such
> > software? Are t
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 4:40 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
[...]
> Incidentally, what exactly is wrong with systemd writing a dhcp server &
> client, and an ntp client? Is that project prohibited from writing such
> software? Are they not allowed to do it? Does it break legal laws? Is
> there an NDA or
On 03/06/2014 23:01, Marc Stürmer wrote:
> Am 03.06.2014 22:14, schrieb Alan McKinnon:
>> This whole systemd thing looks awfully like the switch from a hosts file
>> to DNS so many years ago.
>
> Not really. What many people bothers about systemd is that it is getting
> more and more
>
> a) a har
Am 03.06.2014 22:14, schrieb Alan McKinnon:
This whole systemd thing looks awfully like the switch from a hosts file
to DNS so many years ago.
Not really. What many people bothers about systemd is that it is getting
more and more
a) a hard dependancy for software projects, e.g. like GNOME, a
On 03/06/2014 19:08, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> Who is "forcing" anything? pm-utils has been unmaintained FOR FIVE
> YEARS. Any project that decides to stop using it is making just the
> right decision; UPower just did the correct thing. And systemd had
> *nothing* to do with it, except for prov
On 03/06/2014 18:48, Tanstaafl wrote:
> On 6/3/2014 11:10 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
>> Maybe. The thing is, this is going to keep happening, as more and more
>> infrastructure migrates towards systemd. Perhaps a news item everytime
>> it happens is unrealistic?
>
> Weren't you the one saying
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 11:48 AM, Tanstaafl wrote:
> On 6/3/2014 11:10 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
>>
>> Maybe. The thing is, this is going to keep happening, as more and more
>> infrastructure migrates towards systemd. Perhaps a news item everytime
>> it happens is unrealistic?
>
>
> Weren't y
On 6/3/2014 11:10 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
Maybe. The thing is, this is going to keep happening, as more and more
infrastructure migrates towards systemd. Perhaps a news item everytime
it happens is unrealistic?
Weren't you the one saying that those of us who were voicing concerns
that
On 03/06/2014 16:29, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 9:14 AM, Silvio Siefke wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> mean this i must install now systemd? What can do when i not want systemd.
>> The system what i have is good, i want not change to systemd.
>>
>> [ebuild U ~] sys-devel/gettex
On Tue, 3 Jun 2014 09:29:35 -0500 Canek Peláez Valdés
wrote:
> If I understood correctly, you need to:
>
> emerge -C sys-power/upower
> emerge -1v sys-power/upower-pm-utils
>
> and then update world as usual.
Yes is correct, i has find out after read ebuilds from the packages which
need upower
On 03/06/14 18:10, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
>> Maybe a news item explaining the switch of upower would help those who
>> haven't
>> blundered into this yet.
> Maybe. The thing is, this is going to keep happening, as more and more
> infrastructure migrates towards systemd. Perhaps a news item ev
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> On Tuesday 03 June 2014 09:29:35 Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
>
>> If I understood correctly, you need to:
>>
>> emerge -C sys-power/upower
>> emerge -1v sys-power/upower-pm-utils
>>
>> and then update world as usual.
>
> That worked for me - t
On Tuesday 03 June 2014 09:29:35 Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> If I understood correctly, you need to:
>
> emerge -C sys-power/upower
> emerge -1v sys-power/upower-pm-utils
>
> and then update world as usual.
That worked for me - thanks Canek. Portage no longer tries to break a blockage
circle,
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 9:14 AM, Silvio Siefke wrote:
> Hello,
>
> mean this i must install now systemd? What can do when i not want systemd.
> The system what i have is good, i want not change to systemd.
>
> [ebuild U ~] sys-devel/gettext-0.19 [0.18.3.2] USE="acl cxx ncurses nls
> openmp -cv
81 matches
Mail list logo
