see Bug #437905 for tracking getting services-admin re-released.
--
services-admin should be disabled
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/433701
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.u
There's no need for funding, most of the work is here, Upstart support
isn't that required to get services-admin back and useful. It's just a
matter of packaging. Though, if you want to pay me, just go on, I'll add
Upstart support sooner... :-p
--
services-admin should be disabled
https://bugs.la
Also, why not offer some funding to Carlos to do that work? He'd be
happy to and there were always talks about funding him to put some more
polish into gnome-system-tools. This could benefit the entire community
which is using GST.
--
services-admin should be disabled
https://bugs.launchpad.net/b
I am a bit in a culture shock to see this bug trail. I said back in 2006
and I'm repeating myself now. We need an Ubuntu local system tools
package. That would suite and co-operate nicely with all the new quirks
Ubuntu now uses (upstart being an example).
--
services-admin should be disabled
http
I just wanted to compliment you for the lack of information on how to
enable/disable services via the console. I guess I am not the only one
who has disabled a service via the GUI of services-admin and is clueless
how to re-enable it now.
Don't get me wrong, ubuntu has an unprecedented level of us
Servicemanager has grown up a bit, now it's in version 0.2, it fetches
services descriptions and let enable/disable system V services at boot.
Further updates here: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=8376891
--
services-admin should be disabled
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/433701
You re
Since I wanted to play a bit with glade+gtkpython and I was missing a
mean to manage services through the GUI, I spent a couple of days to
make an upstart graphical front-end "ServiceManager" which is in
attachment.
The program is really simple and lets you only list, stop start and
restart the se
I accept that the services old app doesn't work any more and requires fixing or
replacing.
I understand that no-one has the time. However for a supposedly user-friendly
O/S like Ubuntu to remove the GUI option and leave users no option except to
use the command line is absolutely not a good ide
The menu item is removed. If it stays in your user profile, then it's
because you made customizations to it at some point (perhaps hidden it
using the Menu editor?)
If you create a new user account, you will find that there is no menu
icon
--
services-admin should be disabled
https://bugs.launch
I have just upgraded from 9.04 to 9.10.
There is still "Services" option in Administration menu. When I click it, it
failes because services-admin can not be found.
If you remove services-admin, you also ought to remove this menu item.
--
services-admin should be disabled
https://bugs.launchpa
Yeah, we can imagine several ways of translating descriptions of
services, and .desktop files would be a convenient solution. But that's
really beyond the scope of services-admin... You may want to discuss
that on the Upstart mailing list, for a start. However, we have to
comply with the Linux Stan
@Milan: Yes, we should provide descriptions for those services we
know, and allow operations on all services, even those we don't know.
However, I think the list of "known" services should not be
hard-coded; rather, there should be a way for services to register
themselves with service manager and
Correct me if I'm wrong (it's hard to get details on system-config-
services on the Web), but I don't believe the Fedora tool brings us much
more than we have (or could easily have). It seems to work only with
traditional init scripts, and does not seems to have very different
features from service
Has anyone seen the services GUI used by Fedora? It's pretty nice, much
better than services-admin. I don't know if it works with upstart, but
if so, maybe we could just use that. (It is open source, after all.)
What always bothered me about services-admin is that it wasn't
comprehensive. It was h
@Chris I am not asking for an *immediate* fix, tone down.
@Milan, thanks for the explanation and bug link, knowing this won't work
for another cycle lets me plan and document accordingly.
Hopefully future similar transitions can be planned more sensibly.
--
services-admin should be disabled
htt
See bug 435935 about Upstart support in the system-tools-backends.
--
services-admin should be disabled
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/433701
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists
Fabián: actually I'm currently planning to spend my "fixed amount of
time" on users-admin, which is IMO a more essential part of our system.
I won't be able to fix services-admin in time for Karmic. But if you
want to give it a try, basic support may not be too complex (replacing
calls to "update-r
On Wed, 2009-09-23 at 16:28 +, Fabián Rodríguez wrote:
> Chris I just wonder where is the logic in removing a tool that needs to
> be fixed instead of, well, fixing it.
You seem to assume that we can just wave a magic wand and the tool will
be magically fixed with no effort. If that was possib
Chris I just wonder where is the logic in removing a tool that needs to
be fixed instead of, well, fixing it.
The current situation means we're now back in command line, an important
regression IMO.
--
services-admin should be disabled
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/433701
You received this bug
We removed it altogether because it doesn't work with Upstart jobs. We
haven't provided an alternative because one doesn't exist yet. Would you
rather we carried on shipping an application on the CD that doesn't work
properly?
--
services-admin should be disabled
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/4
What will replace services-admin to start/stop services from the GUI
then ?
If this was/is the only GUI tool for that, it would go a bit against
Ubuntu's motto to remove it altogether before providing an alternative.
--
services-admin should be disabled
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/433701
You
Thanks for the hint. Though, I guess the migration should be more
complex than a mere s/update-rc.d/service/g. We'll have to see how
services are disabled currently, but you may well be right that we have
some custom code (I remember bugs about its implementation not being
right). Service name and
Hi,
As I understand it using "service" should be the preferred way of
manipulating services now. It supports sysvinit and upstart, and
will gracefully handle the transitions.
It doesn't include a "disable" interface, which I think gst provides?
Thanks,
James
--
services-admin should be disabl
This bug was fixed in the package gnome-system-tools - 2.28.0-0ubuntu1
---
gnome-system-tools (2.28.0-0ubuntu1) karmic; urgency=low
[ Chris Coulson ]
* New upstream release 2.27.92 (LP: #433700):
- Network: Remove empty space around buttons on the right (Milan)
- Time:
Yeah, services-admin is in a poor shape... I wanted to ask Scott James
Remnant about what should be done in the system-tools-backends so that
we work with upstart. Would you have any idea if somebody from Canonical
would work on this? :-p
Anyway, splitting it for now is a wise choice IMHO.
--
se
** Branch linked: lp:~ubuntu-desktop/gnome-system-tools/ubuntu
--
services-admin should be disabled
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/433701
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubu
** Attachment added: "Dependencies.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/32125478/Dependencies.txt
** Changed in: gnome-system-tools (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided => Low
** Changed in: gnome-system-tools (Ubuntu)
Status: New => In Progress
** Changed in: gnome-system-tools (Ubuntu)
27 matches
Mail list logo
