iregl_apl_loadDatabase] Error APL: apl initialize fail
Hello. This happens consistently in Wheezy (KDE) when I open a terminal which always loads on the top left side of the screen by default, and then close the terminal window using the x button. This causes my xserver to crash every time. Can anyone help with this please? -- View this message in context: http://debian.2.n7.nabble.com/iregl-apl-loadDatabase-Error-APL-apl-initialize-fail-tp3447686.html Sent from the Debian User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1417794141025-3447686.p...@n7.nabble.com
Re: Debian fork: 'Devuan', Debian without Systemd
Laurent Bigonville-5 wrote > Le Wed, 03 Dec 2014 10:18:36 +0100, > Martin Steigerwald < > Martin@ > > a écrit : > >> Am Mittwoch, 3. Dezember 2014, 08:35:00 schrieb Erwan David: >> > Le 02/12/2014 23:15, Martin Steigerwald a écrit : >> > > Am Dienstag, 2. Dezember 2014, 18:47:38 schrieb Renaud OLGIATI: >> > >> On Tue, 2 Dec 2014 14:22:13 -0700 >> > >> >> > >> Aaron Toponce < > aaron.toponce@ > > wrote: >> > It's a waste. They shouldn't have left. I'm pretty neutral >> > about systemd as I'm only an end user but I disklike having it >> > forced upon me this way. >> > >>> >> > >>> # apt-get install upstart >> > >>> # apt-get install sysvinit-core >> > >>> # apt-get install openrc >> > >>> No one is forcing you to stick with systemd. The "fork" is just >> > >>> silly. >> > >> >> > >> Another way to look at it is "forward planning for the release >> > >> after Jessie, when systemd may well become compulsory..." >> > > >> > > Or going beyond what is offered in Debian… like making GNOME >> > > installable without having any systemd related package installed. >> > >> > The systemd package is just a small part of systemd. I'd like to >> > remove systemd-logind and lbpam-systemd, sinc I have no clue at all >> > that logind is better deisgned and programmed than resolved, which >> > showed it was designed without any care for well known attacks. >> >> I explicetely wrote "any systemd related package". >> [...] >> >> So you can still choose to what init system to use, but running >> completely without any systemd related packages gives you a really >> crippled system. > > As explained several times on this ML, depending against libsystemd0 > package doesn't mean anything about requiring systemd to be used as > PID1 or not. Even Ian's GR was not taking the "I don't want any systemd > package on my machine" use case into account you know. > > But if you have that special concern, you'll have to start recompiling > the packages I'm afraid. Start with policykit and network-manager (and > other package defining a dependency against libpam-systemd) to make > them use ConsoleKit again, you would at least be able to remove the > systemd package completely. And so it comes full circle. This is why there is a need for a Debian fork. /I/ don't have to do any of those things. You don't either. The good folks at Devuan will take care of all that for you. -- View this message in context: http://debian.2.n7.nabble.com/Debian-fork-Devuan-Debian-without-Systemd-tp338p3447295.html Sent from the Debian User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1417757630187-3447295.p...@n7.nabble.com
Re: Why focus on systemd?
Wow, its Lawyer time! Or so one would think reading through this thread. Is this what the Debian community has devolved to? Quibbling over technicalities of the Debian Constitution? Sure gives a lot of weight to Mr. Hess's departing words. That document has turned into a poison pill for this Distro. If we want to talk about Systemd, then talk about Systemd - its technical merits vs. it's cons, etc.. Leave the Lawyering to the Lawyers. -- View this message in context: http://debian.2.n7.nabble.com/Why-focus-on-systemd-tp3427339p3438428.html Sent from the Debian User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1417038949164-3438428.p...@n7.nabble.com
Re: Why focus on systemd?
Lisi Reisz wrote > Systemd is available in the current stable, (see below) and people have > had > time to play and fall in love with it (or not). So in how many Stable > versions of Linux are you saying that it should be available, before those > who wish to do so will have had long enough to play with it? > > Lisi I know it was a tech preview in Wheezy. It was not communicated to Debianland in general (to my knowledge), that this was seriously being considered as the init system/service manager for Jessie. It should have been. This is what needs to happen for Jessie, and then well take a look at it for Jessie+1. -- View this message in context: http://debian.2.n7.nabble.com/Why-focus-on-systemd-tp3427339p3434034.html Sent from the Debian User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1416686642576-3434034.p...@n7.nabble.com
Re: Why focus on systemd?
I understand your reasons for thinking Systemd is bad for Debian. I do, and I also agree with some of them. However, Debian is composed of a diverse group of people who have every viewpoint under the sun from Systemd is the bane of Linux, to Systemd is the best thing to ever happen to Linux. No matter where you fall in that spectrum though, there is one common denominator, and that is that we all use and love Debian. Let's start from there. Making Systemd default in Jessie I believe runs against the Debian philosophy of conservative approach and "release when ready". While I personally disagree with Systemd, I have no problems with it being a part of the Debian family of supported apps. I do feel it is very unwise though to make it the default in Debian because of its monolithic nature and because of the dependency chain problems, which right now at least, make it difficult to run an alternative init system, which limits user choice. This mailing list is about Debian users. Let's stick to talking about issues affecting Debian users. This is my take, and why I oppose the decision to make Systemd the default in the next stable release. I certainly have no qualms about including Systemd in the next stable release, and I actually encourage it, so that people will have time to play with it and come to know and possibly even fall in love with it. I seriously do not understand why this needs to be rushed. -- View this message in context: http://debian.2.n7.nabble.com/Why-focus-on-systemd-tp3427339p3433806.html Sent from the Debian User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1416672234459-3433806.p...@n7.nabble.com
Re: how to boot in les than 8 minutes
Pierre Frenkiel wrote > hi, > it seems that tha last version of systemd in jessie (215-5+b1) > has a big number of bugs, among which the very long time to shutdown, > mainly > for samba (5 minutes). Trying to kill samba manually before the shutdown > did not solve the problem. If this is the future with Systemd, then all the more reason to ensure we maintain more seasoned init systems, which we know work without issues like this. Has Debian utterly forgotten its roots of stability and conservative approach to adopting experimental software in its stable releases? -- View this message in context: http://debian.2.n7.nabble.com/how-to-boot-in-les-than-8-minutes-tp3393095p3394716.html Sent from the Debian User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1413594901817-3394716.p...@n7.nabble.com
Re: GR proposed re: choice of init systems
Good work Ian. It is a well framed GR, and thank you to the seconds. The previous post about the Social Contract is spot-on. I believe the majority of folks who use Debian, do so because of the freedom of choice it provides in their computing environment. We should not ever allow for or accommodate even the smallest possibility for vendor lock-in, which is what Systemd appears to be as time and dependencies continue to grow for it. For this reason alone, Debian should do everything possible to maintain alternate init systems and keep them compatible with multiple DEs, including GNOME. May mean more work, but this is an ideal I believe a lot of contributors will be happy to help with. -- View this message in context: http://debian.2.n7.nabble.com/GR-proposed-re-choice-of-init-systems-tp3393493p3394715.html Sent from the Debian User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1413594618802-3394715.p...@n7.nabble.com
Re: debian-advocacy?
This list is the perfect place for such things. The decision to make Systemd default in Jessie was done by the Technical Committee, not by general vote, so I guess it was decided that the whole discussion about Systemd is a bug because it was relegated to such. This is the mailing list used to discuss bugs and technical issues, is it not? -- View this message in context: http://debian.2.n7.nabble.com/debian-advocacy-tp3389520p3390123.html Sent from the Debian User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1413238053144-3390123.p...@n7.nabble.com
Re: systemd
John Hasler-3 wrote > There may be packages into > which the upstream authors have twisted Systemd dependencies > inextricably, but that is not anything Debian can change. > -- > John Hasler > jhasler@ > Elmwood, WI USA And sir, that is the problem with Systemd and Debians acceptance of it as default. Were Systemd just an Init system then there would not be the controversy about it at all, and in fact, I don't think anyone would have a problem with it. It purposely limits freedom of choice with dependencies. I think this deserves some additional thought on the part of the Debian DDs if this should be the way forward for a Distro which has carried the torch for freedom for 20+ years. We all understand the difficulty with maintaining alternative Init systems in this environment, so the real question is, IF Debian DDs call a vote and move away from the decision to adopt Systemd as default, OR decide to fully support alternative Init systems, can they do so? Will more volunteers be needed to keep a working version of SysV with dependency resolution? -- View this message in context: http://debian.2.n7.nabble.com/systemd-tp3379740p3379944.html Sent from the Debian User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1412482428796-3379944.p...@n7.nabble.com
Re: Debian nolonger claims to be the "Universal Operating System"
Tom Collins wrote > Worthless trash. They need to be stopped, deposed. While many do agree with your sentiment, there is no need to post inflammatory comments such as this. In fact, you do a lot to detract from the cause of those who feel as you do by doing this, so stop, please. If you can't say what you need to say respectfully and politely, then do not post until you calm down and think things through a little better. -- View this message in context: http://debian.2.n7.nabble.com/Debian-nolonger-claims-to-be-the-Universal-Operating-System-tp3379230p3379623.html Sent from the Debian User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1412446820231-3379623.p...@n7.nabble.com
