On 10/24/2013 10:45 AM, Uoti Urpala wrote:
I think you'd basically need a completely separate logind
package for non-systemd systems.
And if you think this is work that must be done, then it is YOUR
responsibility to do it. It's not the systemd maintainers'
responsibility to implement new
Hi James,
since the authoritative-name-server idea was rejected by the list, I was
going to propose alternative:
security-aware-resolver
The definition from RFC4033:
Security-Aware Resolver: An entity acting in the role of a resolver
(defined in section 2.4 of [RFC1034]) that
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013, at 20:16, Octavio Alvarez wrote:
On 22/10/13 09:18, Arturo Borrero Gonzalez wrote:
I would suggest: caching-name-server
*-dns-server would be better, as it is specific enough to avoid name
collision in the future.
JFTR that should not be any name collisions as the
Brian May brian at microcomaustralia.com.au writes:
This looks like the dependency is kernel/platform dependant:
http://packages.debian.org/sid/gnome-settings-daemon has:
dep: systemd [not hppa, hurd-i386, kfreebsd-amd64, kfreebsd-i386, m68k,
powerpcspe, sh4, sparc64]
That’s just
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 04:22:50PM +1100, Brian May wrote:
On 24 October 2013 07:30, Christoph Anton Mitterer
cales...@scientia.netwrote:
In sid, gnome-settings-daemon depends now on systemd.
This looks like the dependency is kernel/platform dependant:
dep: systemd [not hppa, hurd-i386,
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 02:09:46AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
just recall the most epic flamewar in Debian's history),
Peh it wasn't *that* epic. I recall some truly awful ones in around 2006
to which the systemd ones pale in comparison. (Do not interpret this as
a challenge.)
--
To
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 02:09:46AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
And I for one heavily use vservers
It's a professional shame of mine that we are still trying to get rid of
some old vserver instances at $WORK. I am astonished to see that you are
still using them. I didn't think they'd rebased
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 06:27:51PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
So first of all, how hard it is to split is irrelevant. This is work
that must be done, and Debian should not accept excuses for it not
being done.
I have a lot of respect for the Debian systemd maintainers and I think
it should
]] Steve Langasek
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 02:21:25AM +0200, Matthias Klumpp wrote:
2013/10/24 Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org:
[...]
If Gnome depends on gnome-settings-daemon, which now depends on systemd,
this might be a worrying trend, as non-Linux kernels don't support
Le 24/10/2013 10:54, Jonathan Dowland a écrit :
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 06:27:51PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
So first of all, how hard it is to split is irrelevant. This is work
that must be done, and Debian should not accept excuses for it not
being done.
I have a lot of respect for
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 09:11:30AM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 02:09:46AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
And I for one heavily use vservers
It's a professional shame of mine that we are still trying to get rid of
some old vserver instances at $WORK.
lxc is still
]] Thibaut Paumard
The split has already been done, hasn't it? Merely installing the
systemd package does not make systemd the active init system on the
machine. You need to do it yourself or install the systemd-sysv package
for that to happen.
No, that's not a split. That's a set of
On 24 October 2013 10:59, Adam Borowski kilob...@angband.pl wrote:
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 09:11:30AM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 02:09:46AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
And I for one heavily use vservers
It's a professional shame of mine that we are still trying
On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 11:46 +1100, Brian May wrote:
On 24 October 2013 11:09, Adam Borowski kilob...@angband.pl wrote:
* it breaks other users of cgroups. I have not tested this
personally
(mostly because of the above point), but if I understand it
On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 11:59 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 09:11:30AM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 02:09:46AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
And I for one heavily use vservers
It's a professional shame of mine that we are still trying to get
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 11:46:49AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
lxc is still nowhere close to vserver (or openvz) functionality.
OpenVZ is in mainline Linux now. You'll need to wait for Linux 3.12 in
Debian, as we can't enable CONFIG_USER_NS before then, and I don't know
whether the vzctl
On 2013-10-23 22:22, Brian May wrote:
This looks like the dependency is kernel/platform dependant:
http://packages.debian.org/sid/gnome-settings-daemon [1] has:
dep: systemd [not hppa, hurd-i386, kfreebsd-amd64, kfreebsd-i386,
m68k, powerpcspe, sh4, sparc64]
So doesn't break Gnome where
Hello,
I've written a tool to import Debian packages into Git:
git clone deb::mypackage
It does a faithful import of the package history from
snapshot.debian.org. There is some agressive caching built-in, and a
bit of logic to rebuild the history graph from changelogs. It is also
able to
On Oct 24, Dmitrijs Ledkovs x...@debian.org wrote:
What do you mean by holding hostile root. ?
http://blog.bofh.it/debian/id_413
The missing parts (UID virtualization IIRC) are upstream now, and should
be ready for jessie.
Until then if you do not trust containers then the best choice is to
On 24 October 2013 14:18, Gabriel de Perthuis g2p.c...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I've written a tool to import Debian packages into Git:
git clone deb::mypackage
It does a faithful import of the package history from
snapshot.debian.org. There is some agressive caching built-in, and a
* Tollef Fog Heen tfh...@err.no [131024 05:39]:
]] Steve Langasek
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 02:21:25AM +0200, Matthias Klumpp wrote:
2013/10/24 Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org:
[...]
If Gnome depends on gnome-settings-daemon, which now depends on
systemd,
this might be a
On Do, 24 Okt 2013, Charles Plessy wrote:
at this point, I would like to point at a very important part of the
revised code of conduct that Wouter is proposing: Assume good faith.
On Do, 24 Okt 2013, Adam Borowski wrote:
My apologies, I overreacted.
Oh holy s...sunshine (I have to be
On 10/24/2013 04:51 PM, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
]] Steve Langasek
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 02:21:25AM +0200, Matthias Klumpp wrote:
2013/10/24 Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org:
[...]
If Gnome depends on gnome-settings-daemon, which now depends on systemd,
this might be a worrying trend, as
On 10/24/2013 06:46 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 11:59 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 09:11:30AM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 02:09:46AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
And I for one heavily use vservers
It's a professional shame
Le 24/10/2013 15:57, Dmitrijs Ledkovs a écrit :
On 24 October 2013 14:18, Gabriel de Perthuis g2p.c...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I've written a tool to import Debian packages into Git:
git clone deb::mypackage
Is it compatible with Ian's dgit ?
I only know what dgit does from reading
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 11:00:42PM +0900, Norbert Preining wrote:
On Do, 24 Okt 2013, Adam Borowski wrote:
My apologies, I overreacted.
Clear critic with real background - many of us have the same experience -
(how many times did my system break in the last years due to GNome?)
are silence
On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 09:49 -0400, Marvin Renich wrote:
I believe that systemd/GNOME upstream is intentionally coupling the two
in order to force adoption of systemd. There are obviously others who
do not believe this. If it is true, however, I would consider it
sufficient justification to
Marvin Renich m...@renich.org wrote:
* Tollef Fog Heen tfh...@err.no [131024 05:39]:
]] Steve Langasek
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 02:21:25AM +0200, Matthias Klumpp wrote:
2013/10/24 Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org:
[...]
If Gnome depends on gnome-settings-daemon, which now depends
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 03:40:04PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
On Oct 24, Dmitrijs Ledkovs x...@debian.org wrote:
What do you mean by holding hostile root. ?
http://blog.bofh.it/debian/id_413
The missing parts (UID virtualization IIRC) are upstream now, and should
be ready for jessie.
Adrian wrote:
Well, Debian is aiming for full systemd integration with Jessie, so
there is that.
Ummm, no. You and some others might be, but not Debian as a whole
AFAICS.
--
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com
Support the Campaign for Audiovisual Free
Thomas Goirand wrote:
We've been reading again and again from systemd supporters that it's
modular, and that we can use only a subset of it if we like. Now, we're
reading a very different thing: that it's modular *but* we need to
re-implement every bit of it so that the modularity becomes
Hi folks,
This goes back to during the wheezy release cycle. There was a little
discussion around a change in tasksel [1], but rather too late in the
day for the change to make sense. Now we have rather more time, I
feel. Let's change the default desktop for installation to xfce.
This would
On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 15:40 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
On Oct 24, Dmitrijs Ledkovs x...@debian.org wrote:
What do you mean by holding hostile root. ?
http://blog.bofh.it/debian/id_413
The missing parts (UID virtualization IIRC) are upstream now, and should
be ready for jessie.
Until
On 10/24/2013 05:05 PM, Steve McIntyre wrote:
Adrian wrote:
Well, Debian is aiming for full systemd integration with Jessie, so
there is that.
Ummm, no. You and some others might be, but not Debian as a whole
AFAICS.
Yes, I just read what the release team put in their announcement and
was
On Thu, 24 Oct 2013 23:00:42 +0900, Norbert Preining wrote:
On Do, 24 Okt 2013, Charles Plessy wrote:
at this point, I would like to point at a very important part of the
revised code of conduct that Wouter is proposing: Assume good faith.
On Do, 24 Okt 2013, Adam Borowski wrote:
My
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 05:29:16PM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
Yes, I just read what the release team put in their announcement and
was repeating what one of the proposals were.
/
| Proposed Release Goals
| ==
|
| The call for release goals has finished and we
Hi,
On 10/24/2013 17:40, Steve McIntyre wrote:
This would mean:
[...]
* Tweak CD and installer builds:
+ change what happens with no desktop selected to use xfce instead
of Gnome (netinst, DVD, BD etc.)
+ Add an explicitly-named Gnome CD#1
+ Remove the explicitly-named XFCE
Le 24/10/2013 17:08, Uoti Urpala a écrit :
Surely you won't claim that tools
depending on systemd as init is an argument to not use systemd as init!
It's an argument for not depending on those tools, since we don't want
to (and can't) rely on systemd being the init system.
Regards.
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Steve McIntyre st...@einval.com wrote:
Let's change the default desktop for installation to xfce.
...
Pros:
* CD#1 will work again without size worries
* Smaller, simpler desktop
* Works well/better on all supported kernels (?)
* Does not depend on
On 24/10/13 at 15:18 +0200, Gabriel de Perthuis wrote:
Hello,
I've written a tool to import Debian packages into Git:
git clone deb::mypackage
It does a faithful import of the package history from
snapshot.debian.org. There is some agressive caching built-in, and a
bit of logic to
Hi,
On 24/10/13 at 16:40 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
Hi folks,
This goes back to during the wheezy release cycle. There was a little
discussion around a change in tasksel [1], but rather too late in the
day for the change to make sense. Now we have rather more time, I
feel. Let's change
On 24 October 2013 15:15, Gabriel de Perthuis g2p.c...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 24/10/2013 15:57, Dmitrijs Ledkovs a écrit :
On 24 October 2013 14:18, Gabriel de Perthuis g2p.c...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I've written a tool to import Debian packages into Git:
git clone deb::mypackage
Is it
On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 16:05 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
Well, Debian is aiming for full systemd integration with Jessie, so
there is that.
Ummm, no. You and some others might be, but not Debian as a whole
AFAICS.
I just wondered... when and how is this going to be decided? I mean,
whether
On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 18:31 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
What's the the status of XFCE regarding accessibility?
That was a big strengh of GNOME for a long time, though I've heard
rumors (sorry not to be more specific) that gnome-shell has some
unsolved issues in that regard, which is a
On 24 October 2013 17:38, Svante Signell svante.sign...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 18:31 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
What's the the status of XFCE regarding accessibility?
That was a big strengh of GNOME for a long time, though I've heard
rumors (sorry not to be more specific)
But then again you have Flashback mode [0].
And just bashing GNOME DE for systemd and GNOME Classic
is not good enough point because probably the largest user base
of Debian user use GNOME.
This comment should not be seen as pro-GNOME as XFCE is
also decent DE which I also admire. Also I have
Sorry for not setting link to [0]
Here it is https://wiki.gnome.org/GnomeFlashback
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 6:45 PM, Zlatan Todoric zlatan.todo...@gmail.comwrote:
But then again you have Flashback mode [0].
And just bashing GNOME DE for systemd and GNOME Classic
is not good enough point
On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 22:16 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
On 10/24/2013 06:46 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 11:59 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 09:11:30AM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 02:09:46AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
Quoting Adam Borowski (kilob...@angband.pl):
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 09:11:30AM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 02:09:46AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
And I for one heavily use vservers
It's a professional shame of mine that we are still trying to get rid of
On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 16:30 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
Now, let me know - is this the new way of silencing critical voices?
No. But it is a gigantic leap forward in the culture of our community.
Well arguably, one shouldn't be too surprised if people get more and
more pissed off by
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 11:00:42PM +0900, Norbert Preining wrote:
On Do, 24 Okt 2013, Charles Plessy wrote:
at this point, I would like to point at a very important part of the
revised code of conduct that Wouter is proposing: Assume good faith.
On Do, 24 Okt 2013, Adam Borowski wrote:
My
On Jo, 24 oct 13, 16:40:48, Steve McIntyre wrote:
Hi folks,
This goes back to during the wheezy release cycle. There was a little
discussion around a change in tasksel [1], but rather too late in the
day for the change to make sense. Now we have rather more time, I
feel. Let's change the
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Jyrki Pulliainen jy...@dywypi.org
* Package name: dh-virtualenv
Version : 0.5
Upstream Author : Jyrki Pulliainen jy...@spotify.com
* URL : http://www.github.com/spotify/dh-virtualenv
* License : GPL
Programming Lang:
On 24/10/13 at 17:40 +0100, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
On 24 October 2013 17:38, Svante Signell svante.sign...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 18:31 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
What's the the status of XFCE regarding accessibility?
That was a big strengh of GNOME for a long time,
Quoting Adam Borowski (kilob...@angband.pl):
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 03:40:04PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
On Oct 24, Dmitrijs Ledkovs x...@debian.org wrote:
What do you mean by holding hostile root. ?
http://blog.bofh.it/debian/id_413
The missing parts (UID virtualization IIRC)
[Another new topic, sorry -develites]
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 06:38:31PM +0200, Svante Signell wrote:
On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 18:31 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
What's the the status of XFCE regarding accessibility?
That was a big strengh of GNOME for a long time, though I've heard
rumors
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 18:08 +0200, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
On 10/24/2013 17:40, Steve McIntyre wrote:
This would mean:
[...]
* Tweak CD and installer builds:
+ change what happens with no desktop selected to use xfce instead
of Gnome (netinst, DVD, BD etc.)
+ Add an
On Thu, 24 Oct 2013 16:40:48 +0100
Steve McIntyre st...@einval.com wrote:
This goes back to during the wheezy release cycle. There was a little
discussion around a change in tasksel [1], but rather too late in the
day for the change to make sense. Now we have rather more time, I
feel. Let's
On Thu, 24 Oct 2013 18:31:52 +0200
Lucas Nussbaum lu...@debian.org wrote:
On 24/10/13 at 16:40 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
This goes back to during the wheezy release cycle. There was a
little discussion around a change in tasksel [1], but rather too
late in the day for the change to make
Hello,
Please keep debian-accessibility in Cc for accessibility matters,
otherwise concerned people won't be able to provide information :)
Neil Williams, le Thu 24 Oct 2013 18:08:56 +0100, a écrit :
On Thu, 24 Oct 2013 18:31:52 +0200
Lucas Nussbaum lu...@debian.org wrote:
On 24/10/13 at
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 16:40 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
This goes back to during the wheezy release cycle. There was a little
discussion around a change in tasksel [1], but rather too late in the
day for the change to make sense. Now we have rather more time, I
feel. Let's change the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
GNOME can run on BSD. This page documents the procedure done by one
user. https://wiki.gnome.org/TingweiLan/FreeBSD
On 10/24/2013 01:16 PM, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
[Another new topic, sorry -develites]
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 06:38:31PM +0200,
Le 24/10/2013 18:24, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
On 24/10/13 at 15:18 +0200, Gabriel de Perthuis wrote:
Hello,
I've written a tool to import Debian packages into Git:
git clone deb::mypackage
It does a faithful import of the package history from
snapshot.debian.org. There is some
Quoting Brian May (br...@microcomaustralia.com.au):
On 24 October 2013 11:09, Adam Borowski kilob...@angband.pl wrote:
* it breaks other users of cgroups. I have not tested this personally
(mostly because of the above point), but if I understand it right, it takes
over the whole cgroups
+++ Neil Williams [2013-10-24 18:06 +0100]:
On Thu, 24 Oct 2013 16:40:48 +0100
Steve McIntyre st...@einval.com wrote:
This goes back to during the wheezy release cycle. There was a little
discussion around a change in tasksel [1], but rather too late in the
day for the change to make
Le 24/10/2013 18:34, Dmitrijs Ledkovs a écrit :
On 24 October 2013 15:15, Gabriel de Perthuis g2p.c...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 24/10/2013 15:57, Dmitrijs Ledkovs a écrit :
On 24 October 2013 14:18, Gabriel de Perthuis g2p.c...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I've written a tool to import Debian packages
Hi,
Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
[Another new topic, sorry -develites]
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 06:38:31PM +0200, Svante Signell wrote:
On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 18:31 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
What's the the status of XFCE regarding accessibility?
That was a big strengh of GNOME for a
On 24/10/13 17:31, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
What's the the status of XFCE regarding accessibility?
That was a big strengh of GNOME for a long time, though I've heard
rumors (sorry not to be more specific) that gnome-shell has some
unsolved issues in that regard, which is a problem since GNOME
On 24/10/13 16:29, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
I haven't tested GNOME on kfreebsd-* for a long time now, but I
assume that the package works if it has been successfully built,
doesn't it?
I believe the effect of not having systemd-logind is that the features
for which GNOME uses
+1 to xfce, but it might be worth using a nicer theme than the current xfce one.
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 4:46 AM, Simon McVittie s...@debian.org wrote:
On 24/10/13 17:31, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
What's the the status of XFCE regarding accessibility?
That was a big strengh of GNOME for a long
Package: general
Severity: important
Dear Maintainer,
*** Please consider answering these questions, where appropriate ***
* What led up to the situation?
It's a fresh install (Wheezy and Jessie). There was no changes on the
system, and the fan works on high speed, with a normal
]] Marvin Renich
I believe that systemd/GNOME upstream is intentionally coupling the two
in order to force adoption of systemd.
You're aware that GNOME and systemd upstreams are two completely
distinct groups with (AFAIK) very little overlap between them, right?
Even if one assume that they
]] Thomas Goirand
On 10/24/2013 04:51 PM, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
[...]
If GNOME decides they want the DBus interfaces from systemd, that does
not put any obligation on systemd or the systemd maintainers to split
those bits of functionality out of systemd.
We've been reading again and
On 24/10/2013 17:40, Steve McIntyre wrote:
Let's change the default desktop for installation to xfce.
I agree.
I'm using it happily for more than a year and it mostly works. Less
mature than Gnome 2.x, which i still miss, but powerful and functional.
Pros:
* CD#1 will work again without
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 12:25:12PM -0500, Serge Hallyn wrote:
Quoting Brian May (br...@microcomaustralia.com.au):
On 24 October 2013 11:09, Adam Borowski kilob...@angband.pl wrote:
* it breaks other users of cgroups. I have not tested this personally
(mostly because of the above point),
XFCE is short of maintainers, both upstream and debian, but 4.12 is
expected to be released sometime in the next 6 months. That said,
everything both debian and upstream is stable, and a number of 4.11
development release packages are able to be uploaded to experimental
if more people come onboard
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 09:35:30PM +0200, Cesare Leonardi wrote:
On 24/10/2013 17:40, Steve McIntyre wrote:
Let's change the default desktop for installation to xfce.
I agree.
I'm using it happily for more than a year and it mostly works. Less
mature than Gnome 2.x, which i still miss, but
Christoph Anton Mitterer cales...@scientia.net writes:
Well I hope this doesn't turn into some kind of flame war... about
systemd, GNOME or similar.
In sid, gnome-settings-daemon depends now on systemd.
I'm missing a key bit of context here. Does gnome-settings-daemon just
require that
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 06:33:34PM +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
I know of my own tickets I've reported upstream and how outrageously
GNOME deals with some critical things...
Could you give me a few bugnumbers and/or be more concrete what you mean
with outrageously? Do you mean someone
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 09:49:48AM -0400, Marvin Renich wrote:
I believe that systemd/GNOME upstream is intentionally coupling the two
in order to force adoption of systemd. There are obviously others who
GNOME is not. And I'm speaking as a GNOME release team member.
A video of GNOME 3.10
On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 21:42 +0200, Olav Vitters wrote:
Could you give me a few bugnumbers and/or be more concrete what you mean
with outrageously?
Yeah I could, but this already turned far too much into a flame war.
There's e.g. the bug that Evolution silently corrupts eMails, which is
known now
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Nicolas Guilbert nico...@ange.dk
* Package name: snap-byob
Version : 4.0
Upstream Author : Jens Mönig j...@moenig.org
* URL : http://snap.berkeley.edu
* License : AGPL
Programming Lang: Javascript
Description :
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 10:07:53PM +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
I'd call such cases even intentional malicious behaviour against user.
I'm sure you can easily find the related bugs, but please keep them away
from here, since the flames do not need even more coals to burn higher.
This seems a little bit of a distraction from the issue at hand (Debian
Development) — perhaps you and the OP could follow up off list?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 22:37 +0200, Olav Vitters wrote:
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 10:07:53PM +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
I'd call such cases even intentional malicious behaviour against user.
I'm sure you can easily find the related bugs, but please keep them away
from here,
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 12:13:34PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
And this is not just an issue because of people not wanting to use systemd
init, but also because systemd init *can't* run in a container.
Whoah, that's not true:
sudo systemd-nspawn -bD ~/images/fedora-19
works just fine :)
This is a move to SABOTAGE linux as an OS.
--
Mark
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 10:30:41PM +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
Hi.
Well I hope this doesn't turn into some kind of flame war... about
systemd, GNOME or similar.
In sid, gnome-settings-daemon depends now on systemd.
I
On 24/10/13 03:00, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 02:21:25AM +0200, Matthias Klumpp wrote:
2013/10/24 Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org:
Well, that's one more reason the init system and the dbus services should
be
separated out in the packaging.
Some of the services consume
Hi.
Since some people have demanded to drop GNOME as default desktop in my
systemd effectively mandatory now due to GNOME thread the following
popped up in my mind:
On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 16:40 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
Let's change the default desktop for installation to xfce.
Do we need to
I agree with the people who suggest getting rid of the concept of a
'default' desktop but I don't know how practical it is since not all
users will be capable of choosing a desktop. So we need to develop
some guidance for them. In the netinst image and web pages a list of
desktop blends would need
Roger Lynn ro...@rilynn.me.uk writes:
How often is the choice of default desktop re-evaluated, and how is this
done?
We have an argument about it at least once every release cycle. One of
the problems with the recurring argument is that we don't have a good
decision-making criteria. Another
On 25 October 2013 03:33, Christoph Anton Mitterer cales...@scientia.netwrote:
Well arguably, one shouldn't be too surprised if people get more and
more pissed off by GNOME _upstream_ .
They continuously try to push their agenda through and force their
blessings (most of the time broken, e.g.
On 25 October 2013 06:24, Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl wrote:
- GNOME 3.10 runs on OpenBSD (probably good to repeat this :P)
If I understand this correctly, upstream Gnome 3.10 will run fine on
OpenBSD.
However the Debian packages won't work on OpenBSD, as gnome-settings-daemon
depends on
Christoph Anton Mitterer cales...@scientia.net writes:
But do we really need a default desktop environment?
There are different ways of presenting the choice that make the choice
more or less obvious, but it's hard to avoid a default choice in an
installer. Even if you force the user to pick
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Russ Allbery wrote:
There are different ways of presenting the choice that make the choice
more or less obvious, but it's hard to avoid a default choice in an
installer. Even if you force the user to pick one of a list of options,
users will tend to pick the
Paul Wise p...@debian.org writes:
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Russ Allbery wrote:
There are different ways of presenting the choice that make the choice
more or less obvious, but it's hard to avoid a default choice in an
installer. Even if you force the user to pick one of a list of
On Fri, 2013-10-25 at 06:48 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
I agree with the people who suggest getting rid of the concept of a
'default' desktop but I don't know how practical it is since not all
users will be capable of choosing a desktop.
I don't think user's are that stupid.
Just think about the
On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 16:08 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Even if you force the user to pick one of a list of options,
users will tend to pick the first on the list.
Randomise the order (every time).
And note that I wouldn't suggest to add all things that can be vaguely
considered a desktop
Andrei wrote:
On Jo, 24 oct 13, 16:40:48, Steve McIntyre wrote:
Hi folks,
This goes back to during the wheezy release cycle. There was a little
discussion around a change in tasksel [1], but rather too late in the
day for the change to make sense. Now we have rather more time, I
feel. Let's
Paul Wise p...@debian.org writes:
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Russ Allbery wrote:
There are different ways of presenting the choice that make the
choice more or less obvious, but it's hard to avoid a default choice
in an installer. […]
If you need to eliminate the concept of
1 - 100 of 191 matches
Mail list logo
