Uoti Urpala dixit:
They have had an overall negative effect on people working on Linux
within Debian and people creating derivatives.
Besides what Russ said: Debian isn’t about Linux.
Debian is the universal operating system.
bye,
//mirabilos
--
18:47⎜mirabilos:#!/bin/mksh well channels… you
On 31 December 2013 12:55, Colin Watson cjwat...@debian.org wrote:
The criticisms of Upstart's event model in the systemd position
statement simply do not make sense to me. Events model how things
actually happen in reality; dependencies are artificial constructions on
top of them, and making
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014, at 1:45, Uoti Urpala wrote:
On Thu, 2014-01-16 at 17:52 +, Ian Jackson wrote:
* Debian is a forum for cooperation and technical development.
* Debian, as a piece of software, tries to be all things to all
people (within reason).
This flexibility and
Hi,
On Donnerstag, 16. Januar 2014, Anthony Towns wrote:
it's not realistic for a porter to continously test startup
scripts for thousands of packages.
It's reasonable to semi-continuously test installation scripts for
thousands of packages -- that's what piuparts does, and we have
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 12:05:22PM +0100, Holger Levsen wrote:
Hi,
On Donnerstag, 16. Januar 2014, Anthony Towns wrote:
it's not realistic for a porter to continously test startup
scripts for thousands of packages.
It's reasonable to semi-continuously test installation scripts for
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 12:50 AM, Anthony Towns a...@erisian.com.au wrote:
On 31 December 2013 12:55, Colin Watson cjwat...@debian.org wrote:
The criticisms of Upstart's event model in the systemd position
statement simply do not make sense to me. Events model how things
actually happen
Tollef Fog Heen writes (Bug#727708: Init system resolution open questions):
[Ian Jackson]:
As I mentioned on IRC, I think we need to get some clear answers to
certain questions from everybody.
It's not clear to me that the CTTE is allowed to rule on a bunch of
those questions, especially
Adrian Bunk writes (Re: Bug#727708: Init system resolution open questions):
(Only as a PM since I am repeating myself.)
Thanks for your mail. I think it deserves wider consideration.
One question you should consider adding:
* What switching between init systems has to be supported?
On 2014-01-17 20:41:59 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
On the Thu, 16 Jan 2014 17:18:24 +0100, Josselin Mouette
j...@debian.org wrote:
This assumes that OpenRC can be fixed to have parallel boot, otherwise
this is a big regression from the current insserv setup.
This is just plain wrong,
]] Ian Jackson
Tollef Fog Heen writes (Bug#727708: Init system resolution open questions):
[Ian Jackson]:
As I mentioned on IRC, I think we need to get some clear answers to
certain questions from everybody.
It's not clear to me that the CTTE is allowed to rule on a bunch of
Friends,
Spotify, an online streaming music service, is a significant user of Debian
GNU/Linux. We have some 5000 physical servers and well over a thousand
virtual servers using both public and private clouds running Debian
GNU/Linux serving millions of songs to our users every day.
We would
Uoti Urpala wrote:
Even the upstart proponents do not seem to have significant arguments
about upstart having better functionality, and there don't seem to be
all that many people who would have a reasonably informed opinion that
upstart would be technically better even for just their
Le vendredi 17 janvier 2014 à 08:47 +, Thorsten Glaser a écrit :
Besides what Russ said: Debian isn’t about Linux.
Debian is the universal operating system.
Just because you don’t understand that sentence doesn’t mean you can use
it to justify whatever convoluted position of yours.
An
On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 01:01:51PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
I think that major packages that would be considered release blockers,
which probably includes GNOME, KDE, and Xfce, need to support the default
Linux init system in the sense that, if they don't, I don't think we can
release.
I
Hey.
Well not sure whether this is actually welcomed or not,... but since
some people have already started to share their personal feelings about
the debate, I want to do so as well.
I've been using sysvinit for countless years (as most of us)... and I've
tried both, systemd and upstart when
On Fri, 2014-01-17 at 16:13 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Just because you don’t understand that sentence doesn’t mean you can use
it to justify whatever convoluted position of yours.
I wonder who really doesn't understand here...
An operating system is universal if it can be used for all
Moritz Muehlenhoff dixit:
FreeBSD upstream isn't a desktop OS and never will be, there're just too
many deficiencies (e.g. lack of dbus
Eh, excuse me! It’s obviously possible to run a desktop without dbus!
In fact, this is a feature, in my eyes.
limited hardware support
Oh c’mon. Linux does
Christoph Anton Mitterer dixit:
- At most upstream projects (the kernel, wayland, X, etc. pp.) people
seem to at least think first about systemd...
Only those that have strong ties to Poettering, Red Hat, GNOME.
if they support upstart at all.
Right, upstart is, right now, a Canonical
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 04:37:45PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
- We believe that systemd will have the stronger community momentum moving
forward when it comes to seeing close integration between modern init
system features and upstream projects.
I believe that this is precisely a reason
On Fri, 2014-01-17 at 16:01 +, Ian Jackson wrote:
The universal operating system
phrase is a slogan.
Sure it is, but that slogan actually stands for some important
principles in the open source world... like not to force stuff upon
users... and allowing many different things to happily
Christoph Anton Mitterer cales...@scientia.net writes:
On Fri, 2014-01-17 at 16:01 +, Ian Jackson wrote:
The universal operating system phrase is a slogan.
Sure it is, but that slogan actually stands for some important
principles in the open source world... like not to force stuff upon
Andrew Shadura and...@shadura.me writes:
It is actually fairly easy to write an initscript which uses native
OpenRC facilities if they're available. While this serves little
practical use, I tried to play with this, and this is the result:
Thanks for sharing that.
Bdale
pgpRO75eKg_7I.pgp
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 05:08:51PM +0100, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
On Fri, 2014-01-17 at 16:01 +, Ian Jackson wrote:
The universal operating system
phrase is a slogan.
Sure it is, but that slogan actually stands for some important
principles in the open source world... like not
Thomas Goirand z...@debian.org writes:
It's with great joy that I can announce here that OpenRC now supports
GNU/Hurd. I have just added a few patches which were worked out with
upstream (you can look at them, it's really trival FTBFS fixing...),
tested it, and I can happily say it works.
On Fri, 2014-01-17 at 16:08 +0100, Ihar Filipau wrote:
Uoti Urpala wrote:
Even the upstart proponents do not seem to have significant arguments
about upstart having better functionality, and there don't seem to be
all that many people who would have a reasonably informed opinion that
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 04:46:43PM +0100, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
Well not sure whether this is actually welcomed or not,... but since
some people have already started to share their personal feelings about
the debate, I want to do so as well.
I don't think this is necessary or helpful
Anthony Towns a...@erisian.com.au writes:
To emulate systemd dependencies in an event model (ie, X depends on
Y), you'd need to do either:
* change Y's job to say start on starting X
* add stop on stopping Y to X's job description
or
* add a pre-start script to X in order to
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes:
I don't believe we need to know the answer to these questions to know
that Ian's requirement is a correct one. If we are saying that packages
cannot drop their sysvinit scripts in jessie in order to ensure smooth
upgrades, then the same requirement
On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 12:08:41PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk writes:
AFAICT we are all agreed that:
* Applications which aren't part of the init system must not require a
particular init to be pid 1. (So in particular a desktop
First off, I'd like to apologize again for taking so long to figure out
and write up my opinion. I still feel a little bit swamped with all of
the information that I've reviewed to come to my opinion, and I
certainly don't yet completely understand the full architecture of
either upstart or
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 8:41 PM, Don Armstrong d...@debian.org wrote
Upstart's CLA is problematic, and coupled with the fact that the rest
of
the non-Debian distributions appear to be standardizing on systemd
gives
me pause. I'm not sure if this is actually a major concern, though, as
long as
On Sat, 18 Jan 2014, Cameron Norman wrote:
If you have the time, I must ask: if Upstart had no CLA, would you
prefer it over systemd?
No, but it would certain close the gap even more.
Wildly Off-Topic: I should note that I think if upstart did not have the
CLA that it does, the rest of the
32 matches
Mail list logo
