On Mar 06, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> > - cgroups (needed for accounting and management of system resources)
> I thought the libcgroup package handled this one, but might be wrong.
I understand that the cgconfig program from cgroup-bin does mount it
(in /mnt/cgroups/cpu, which I believe to be t
Package: initscripts
Version: 2.87dsf-8.1
Severity: normal
I am tentatively opening this bug on initscripts to start a discussion,
but I am unsure about the best way to solve the problem.
Still, I believe it is important to solve it in time for the next
release because it is a prerequisite of some
On Mar 05, Harald Braumann wrote:
> I'd like to propose a `sensible-mailer' command. The main usage would
> be to handle `mailto' links. But maybe such functionality already exists
> and I'm just not aware of it, or there are specific reasons for not
> implementing this.
http://portland.freedeskt
On Feb 26, Luca Capello wrote:
> >> 5) Do we recommend that new installations of lenny or of squeeze avoid
> >> Xen for ease of upgrading to squeeze+1? If so, what should they use?
> > It depends. KVM in lenny is buggy and lacks important features. While it
> > works fine for development and cas
On Feb 26, Philipp Kern wrote:
> Wow, logic. Because they don't have monetary resources to buy new
> servers they have a vast amount of time instead?
Why should they expect other people to solve their problems for them?
Free software is not about other people working in your place.
--
ciao,
Ma
On Feb 26, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> I understand the pain of maintaining Xen, but believe it is bad idea
> to defend replacing it with kvm by claiming those needing
> virtualization and not having servers with hardware support are few
> and should just get new servers.
Obviously these people
On Feb 25, John Goerzen wrote:
> 3) What will be our preferred Linux server virtualization option after
> squeeze? Are we confident enough in the stability and performance of
> KVM to call it such? (Last I checked, its paravirt support was of
Yes.
> rather iffy stability and performance, but I
On Feb 23, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> In this case the speed difference from using non-PIC code is
> noticeable. But the memory pressure from not sharing code between
> processes might mean it is not worth it --- I am really torn.
If the programs are linked statically then they will have the same
On Feb 23, Thomas Weber wrote:
> You have x86 hardware that is so old that it doesn't run amd64, but at
> the same moment you care about speed?
Why should I not care about speed if the hardware is slow?
Anyway, there are often good reasons to use x86 on modern hardware
(think about laptops and sm
On Feb 23, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mardi 23 février 2010 à 14:43 +0100, Marco d'Itri a écrit :
> > Using non-PIC code for a 5% speed up looks like an acceptable trade off
> > to me, but it really must be restricted only to architectures which
> > need it.
&
On Feb 23, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> The usual i386-centric reason: the PIC version is (~5%) slower than
> the non-PIC version. See PACKAGERS in the source, section 4.1.
> I considered doing this only on i386, but since I only have an i386 to
> test on, I would worry about missing packaging bugs.
On Feb 22, markus schnalke wrote:
> However, I think the problem could be solved by making the user uucp a
> member of group mail. From my limited POV, this solution represents
> the logic behind: uucp wants to use special facilities of the MTA,
> thus it needs to be in group mail.
This does not
On Feb 20, Alexander Wirt wrote:
> source 3.0 (quilt) is still missing tools to make it working out of the box.
> If you quilt not only in debian packages its fucking annoying that you need
> to change to patch of your patches from patches/ to debian/patches depending
> on what you are working on
On Feb 20, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> I've seen this for other safety-critical tools, e.g. the dar backup tool
> which comes both as "dar" and "dar-static". I personally don't believe
> there would be *much* use of "dpkg-static", but having it around for a
> release would enable to see if/how ma
On Feb 20, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> For network based boots, specifically high performance cluster, the size
> can make a real difference. When you turn the cluster on it is not just
> one system downloading an extra meg but 100+ nodes. That largely
> increases the network collisions, errors
On Feb 14, Paul Wise wrote:
> Kinda a dissapointing thread, but it reveals a few points:
I see more handwaving than points.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Feb 13, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> The upstream default is that they are disabled. The onus is on
> proponents to argue why this should be changed.
The proposed rationale for the change is that SYN cookies are not used
until the SYN queue is full and at that point it is more useful to have
new TC
On Feb 07, Luk Claes wrote:
> The whole archive needs to be scanned to see if no functionality of
> e2fsprogs is used without (build) dependency.
So, how can this be done?
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Feb 13, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> I'm going to agree with Bastian here. Single-user systems won't need
> this and system administrators can make their own choice.
I do not really disagree with your argument, but can you or the other
people who oppose this explain more clearly why you consider en
On Feb 08, Michael Meskes wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 04:45:53AM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > If the defaults for some drivers are wrong then I can't see why they
> > should not be fixed, but if default configuration parameters are needed
> > then they sho
On Feb 07, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> I'd rather we had a watchdog mini policy that boils down to:
As the udev and module-init-tools maintainer my goal is to support
automatically loading all the drivers which their maintainers intended
to be automatically loaded and blacklist until the
On Feb 07, Frans Pop wrote:
> > Now that /sbin/fsck is provided by util-linux it should be possible to
> > drop the Essential attribute from the e2fsprogs. How do we do this?
> Does that also mean initscripts will be dropping its dependency on
> e2fsprogs?
initscripts in squeeze already only rec
Now that /sbin/fsck is provided by util-linux it should be possible to
drop the Essential attribute from the e2fsprogs. How do we do this?
e2fsprogs is not needed when the system uses other file systems or does
not have its own (e.g. openvz and lxc containers) and removing it would
save a few MB.
On Feb 06, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> It got renamed to wdt_tco, I think, and it will hard-hang a lot of thinkpads
> if it ever triggers, for example: the SMBIOS can't handle it.
OK, I will blacklist this one.
> Anyway, if for any reason we load a watchdog driver, AND any of the watchd
On Feb 05, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> do not remember any more details. This was discovered a few years
> ago, and I hope that crazy driver has been fixed in the mean time.
So it looks like this *is* my fault, in my defense I can only say that I
got bad advice from the kernel maintainers...
ht
/etc/modprobe.d/blacklist.conf contains this comment, but why?
# watchdog drivers should be loaded only if a watchdog daemon is installed
I maintain the package providing it, but I fear it is the result of
cargo cult sysadmining.
A driver will not engage the watchdog anyway until /dev/watchdog
On Feb 03, Guus Sliepen wrote:
> But, that's still a license. But look carefully, it says "without fee" in the
> license. I don't know if that means "you can use it without paying anyone" or
> "you can only redistribute it if you don't charge anyone".
The first meaning is the one widely accepted
On Jan 25, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 12:26:42AM +0000, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > Actually I meant "vzctl exec" so this is not even close: I need to
> > change the context of a running process.
> Hu? "vzctl exec" does a fork and an ex
On Jan 24, maximilian attems wrote:
> the plan as decided in Portland was to go forward with openvz
> if upstream provides us with a patch in time. as currently this
> looks quite bad (latest available patch is for 2.6.27, there is
> no sign of a patch for 2.6.32, nor any schedule like it happene
On Jan 14, Fathi Boudra wrote:
> it was my use case, unfortunately udev package upgrade failed and
> apt-get dist-upgrade stopped.
This is the cause, the new linux-image-2.6.32-trunk-* packages do not
match the regexp.
Kernel people, should I change it?
ver=$(echo $pkg | sed -nr
"s/^.*linux-im
On Jan 14, Fathi Boudra wrote:
> I would like to come back to the distribution upgrade issue since udev
> package cannot be installed if the kernel doesn't support
> CONFIG_SYSFS_DEPRECATED (like Lenny kernel 2.6.26).
Yes, this will require a lockstep upgrade like it happened for lenny.
If you up
On Jan 06, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > Remember that item 4 of the social contract states that: "Our
> > priorities are our users and free software."
> Every time you say that, god kills a kitten. Please, think of the
> kittens.
We need something like Godwin's law about it.
--
ciao,
Marco
sign
On Jan 04, Brian May wrote:
> Somewhere I got lost in this discussion.
You did not, he did.
> In that case, how can correct programs be broken if IPv6 is not supported?
> Surely it is just a matter of binding to IPv4 and ignoring the error that
> occurs when trying to bind to the IPv6 socket (or
On Jan 03, "Bernhard R. Link" wrote:
> You can call bullshit whatever how often you want. That does not change
> that many people have had those problems and thus have ipv6 backlisted
> (or not even compiled in if they have their own kernels built) and
> programs not working with that are broken.
On Dec 30, "Bernhard R. Link" wrote:
> > > I routinely blacklist the ipv6 module. There are far too many
> > > programs breaking or doing stuff I do not want if it is loaded.
I call bullshit on this.
> a) netstat garbling the addresses of connected endpoints
This is one of the reasons why bindv
On Dec 28, Jari Aalto wrote:
> It would be good if something similar were adopted to *-dbg packages as
No, it would not since as it has been explained they all work the same
way (i.e. you install one and it magically works).
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Dec 28, Russell Coker wrote:
> In the modern Internet where services such as EC2 are increasing in
> popularity
> in the vast majority of cases the purpose of a hostname is only for tracking
> errors.
If you are too lazy to have a script properly configure your servers it
does not mean that
On Dec 23, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
> 1. It obviously doesn't do this only on new installation but also on upgrades.
This is correct.
> 2. You cite RFC3493 but your request (and action) obviously violates it:
RFC3493 is informational.
> Did you ever test that "setting this option back to 0 by a p
On Dec 20, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > The problem is in the other direction: new binaries reference
> > sym...@libfoo_1.0, so even if they work the old library the dynamic
> > linker outputs a warning at startup.
> Which is why Steve talked of a shlibdeps bump, which would cover this,
> since the
On Dec 20, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > How can I write an ld linker script that will cause ld to output the
> > same symbols two times, with and without a version tag?
> > I.e. I need it to output both sym...@base and sym...@libfoo_1.0.
> In what sense does this make it backward-incompatible? A s
How can I write an ld linker script that will cause ld to output the
same symbols two times, with and without a version tag?
I.e. I need it to output both sym...@base and sym...@libfoo_1.0.
The final goal is to fix a library which was made backward incompatible
for no good reason by adding a versi
On Dec 10, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Can you explain (or give pointers to an explanation) what the
> argumentation here is? How does not adhering to relevant standards
> simplify configuration?
There is no relevant standard that says what the default of IPV6_V6ONLY
should be. Currently what happen
On Dec 10, Roman Mamedov wrote:
> Marco, by making this change I assume you offer your personal help in dealing
> with its consequences? Please feel free to submit a fix to #560137, thanks in
> advance.
I provided the usual workaround, but the "correct" solution would be to
open two sockets.
BTW
On Oct 24, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> I am proposing to set net.ipv6.bindv6only=1 by default for new
> installations
Done, let's see what breaks. :-)
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Nov 28, Bastian Blank wrote:
> The Linux image packages needs to do some modifications to core
> configuration files like fstab in the future to allow newer kernels to
> work. To do this and the planned further extension I intend to make all
> linux image packages depend on python.
This is not
On Nov 16, Andres Mejia wrote:
> Well, really the only reason why I'm even bothering to package this is
> because
> I'm working on an assignment which I want to make sure builds and runs on
> CentOS and OSX and making Digest::SHA::PurePerl work would be easier for me
> than making Digest::SHA
On Nov 11, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>O_CLOEXEC (Since Linux 2.6.23)
>
> So why does using this flag require 2.6.27? Who is wrong here?
I understand that it is needed for inotify_init1(2).
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Nov 10, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> Due to changes in udev 147, squeeze will not support kernels earlier
> than 2.6.27.
I uploaded a 147-2 package which reverts the O_CLOEXEC change and allows
2.6.26, let's see if it works.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Nov 10, Philipp Kern wrote:
> > Yes, it would not work because they also tend to be incompatible with
> > older configurations and so packages would need to provide two sets of
> > configuration files (for a start).
> Uh, so the reboot to get a newer kernel before the upgrade could possibly fa
On Nov 10, Andres Salomon wrote:
> Since it's seeming more and more common for udev to be tied to specific
> kernel versions, have you considered allowing major versions of udev
> to be installed in parallel?
Yes, it would not work because they also tend to be incompatible with
older configuratio
Due to changes in udev 147, squeeze will not support kernels earlier
than 2.6.27.
If your packages have code needed to support old kernels, this is the
right time to clean it up.
This means that lenny->squeeze upgrades will use the same lockstep
kernel/udev upgrade method used for etch->lenny upg
On Nov 08, Luk Claes wrote:
> - seed couples transition to gupnp and poppler transition (via
> gir-repository)
> - evince couples transition to poppler transition
seed due to gobject-introspection blocks udev, whose next release will
cause/require a concurrent upgrade of consolekit.
--
ciao,
Ma
On Oct 28, Guus Sliepen wrote:
> polipo and ircd-hybrid are the only ones that are problematic for me. I guess
> things have improved. Well, except for those daemons that are not listening on
> IPv6 at all of course...
ircds need custom configuration anyway, so this does not look like a
problem.
On Oct 28, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> 22:27 < dondelelcaro> it averaged around 180K messages per day for the past
> week; today it's already done 190K, and I think the most
> it can handle in a day is probably around 230K
It could be argued that relying on
On Oct 25, Kees Cook wrote:
> I would like to propose enabling[1] the GCC hardening patches that Ubuntu
> uses[2].
Seconded.
hardening-wrapper does not looks like a solution to me since it execs
perl for each call to gcc and ld when installed (even when inactive).
And as you noticed, nobody uses
On Oct 25, Jarek Kami?ski wrote:
> I run this configuration on most of my systems and don't have many
> problems. There was some problem with apache, but it's now fixed. Also
> java is broken and my bug report got ignored by sun, but it should be
> easy patchable (preloading socket() and calling
On Oct 25, Russ Allbery wrote:
> This is really the right solution. We did this a while back for INN and
> it's cleared up a bunch of complexity and weirdness. It would be nice if
> we could just get all the applications patched, although I suppose that's
> unrealistic.
This is why I would be s
On Oct 24, Guus Sliepen wrote:
> And bindv6only=0 is also not RFC compliant. However, a *lot* of applications
> that use listening sockets will not work correctly anymore when you change the
> default. So it probably is better to make it a release goal that applications
Can you make a list? I do
I am proposing to set net.ipv6.bindv6only=1 by default for new
installations, to simplify configuration and administration of systems
using IPv6 and to make the system behaviour match the one of all other
operating systems, which default to this or just do not provide a
choice.
When net.ipv6.bindv
A: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post
Q: Were do I find info about this thing called top-posting?
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
A: No.
Q: Should I includ
Any opinions?
This ONLY MATTERS if the user is using a self-compiled kernel, upgrades
of Debian kernel packages are automatically detected.
- Forwarded message from Greg Alexander -
From: Greg Alexander
To: Marco d'Itri
Subject: Re: Bug#551140: udev preinstall script fails if k
On Oct 14, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I'm not sure what we'd do with, say, a free software program whose sole
> and exclusive purpose is to interact with the iTunes music store. Putting
> it into contrib does feel like nitpicking.
I am: the same thing which we do e.g. with ICQ clients.
It was settled
On Oct 07, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> may be a fail of the dissident test, as there is the word "must".
Which would not make it non-free either, as it is not part of the DFSG.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Oct 04, Neil Roeth wrote:
> Good timing, I just ran into this. :-) What is the "mechanism used for etch
> to lenny upgrade"? How does it resolve the issue?
It does not, but it makes sure that if udev is being upgraded then an
acceptable kernel is being installed. Look at preinst.
--
ciao,
Recent releases of udev depend on signalfd(2), so squeeze will require
at least a 2.6.22 kernel.
The mechanism used for the etch to lenny upgrade is still in place, so
hopefully it will work again.
I suppose that the release notes will need to be updated.
The udev package in unstable does not ref
On Sep 25, Julien Cristau wrote:
> Doesn't this break co-installability of libfoo2.0-X and libfoo2.0-Y, if
> both install Foo-2.0.gir?
And what about multiarch?
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sep 16, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> People are still using pop/imap before smtp? OMG.
People are also still using 10 years old systems in production, so
anything that helps integrating them in modern infrastructure is
useful.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sep 16, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> This bug should *NOT* be closed. Getting a deprecation warning for a simple
> and
> common use of iptables is a bug somewhere, either in iptables or the kernel.
Sometimes life is just not how we would like it to be, and by accepting
this you could save much ange
On Sep 15, Lars Bahner wrote:
> Prey tell, what is wrong with maintainers of for example iptables,
> providing a conffile
> with samples (which may even be commented out) which they can
> reference to in their documentation, where they comment on the
> different settings?
That it duplicates the s
On Sep 14, jida...@jidanni.org wrote:
> LB> You could file this a a wishlist bug report against the iptables
> LB> package, and see if the maintainer wish to add this file (or a larger
> LB> /etc/sysctl.d/iptables.conf with some sane defaults).
What makes you believe that the kernel defaults are
On Sep 13, Niko Tyni wrote:
> 246 packages failed to build with 'Error 13' at the end of the log,
It's a big number. Can you add a temporary workaround for a few
months until most packages are fixed?
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sep 07, "Roberto C. Sánchez" wrote:
> As part of the shorewall package reorganization, the
> /etc/init.d/shorewall init script (and the symlinks to it) has moved
> from the shorewall-common package to the shorewall package. However,
> after the upgrade of shorewall-common (which has become a
On Sep 04, Serafeim Zanikolas wrote:
> As the new vict^Wmaintainer of update-inetd, I'd appreciate a review of the
> proposal below to migrate it to dpkg triggers [0]
Maybe you could have discussed it with the former maintainer, so I could
have explained why I never implemented the changes you ar
On Sep 06, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
> And what about embedded systems? They start to use those libraries for even
> the simplest utilities that are also usuable on very small systems. And
> that's
No, "they" do not.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sep 06, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > When should maintainers start adding upstart jobs to their packages?
> Not before the upstart compat package that provides upstart-job for
> sysvinit-based systems is available.
Is this relevant for Linux-specific packages as well? I.e., do we want
to continue
On Sep 06, Steve Langasek wrote:
> If you're unable to persuade upstream to change their implementation, and
> you're unwilling to diverge from upstream to ensure the package complies
> with Debian policy, your other option is to orphan the package and let
I am willing to diverge from upstream an
Great news. I really look forward to converting my init scripts to
native upstart jobs, but I believe that some clarifications are needed
about the long-term impact of switching to upstart.
Can you clarify what normal packages will have to do to support the
non-Linux ports which are unable to run
On Sep 05, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > They are currently providing most of the manpower for developing udev
> > and the related infrastructure so this is pretty much the practical
> > effect, yes.
> So what, you think this means we don't have any right to object when they
> design things wrong?
No
On Sep 05, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> It is my understanding that the events get triggered in/before the
> initramfs and need to be replayed after switching to / already.
> How is replaying them when entering runlevel 2 any different from
> that?
The main issue is that the rules which run in t
On Sep 04, Bjørn Mork wrote:
> The issue is most certainly raised by other distributions. See e.g. the
> thread starting with http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/62973
This is about the micromanagement of dependencies which greatly excites
Gentoo users, so is not very relevant (and
On Sep 04, Bastian Blank wrote:
> Why do you not extend the current setup to do another step? Currently we
Even if this were possible at all, it would require (for a start):
- working out all the possible side effects of synthesizing all/most
(which ones?) events a second time
- having to forwa
On Sep 04, Ron Johnson wrote:
> Whatever the cause, it breaks the FHS.
Since it keeps being repeated, it is time to destroy this argument.
FHS documents what distributions want to do: of the other relevant
distributions, representatives from Red Hat and Suse said they do not
support this and exce
On Sep 04, Gabor Gombas wrote:
> Incompetent, no. Careless, yes. Just think about the udev-related
> breakages in the past. And speaking about design, udev was originally
> praised because it can do everything in user space. Now, the authors of
> udev are proposing devtmpfs, because as it turned
On Sep 04, Steve Langasek wrote:
> I still can't fathom why someone decided that udev should be responsible for
> translating PCI IDs and USB IDs into text strings. This smells of crazy.
I think that part of the rationale is that eventually HAL will go away
replaced by udev and programs like thi
On Sep 03, Daniel Leidert wrote:
> Posting to debian-devel too. Please comment.
Don't do this. gnupg is 5 MB big, if we keep increasing the size of the
root file system what is the point of supporting a standalone /usr/?
Using cryptsetup+gnupg for /usr is a niche configuration of an already
niche
On Sep 01, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Why do programs need udev to read this information in at driver load time?
> Why can't packages that need this information query it when they need it
> (which is well after /usr is mounted), instead of expecting udev to provide
> it?
I did not design this aspect
On Sep 01, Gabor Gombas wrote:
> How about re-running the rules after all the filesystems have been
> mounted?
No.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sep 01, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Wouldn't make it sense then if udev had a recommends or at least suggests for
> usbutils and pciutils?
Yes, the next upload (today in experimental maybe) will do this.
> How will usb-id and pci-id behave, if the ids files are not accessible?
Print an error on st
On May 31, md wrote:
> The issue was raised by the udev upstream maintainer along with the udev
> package maintainers of the major distributions, who all agreed that this
> configuration is not supported.
FYI, udev 146 ships usb-id and pci-id programs which read
/usr/share/misc/usb.ids and /usr/sh
On Aug 31, Bastian Blank wrote:
> I doubt that I would be able to push this port through another release
> in the current state. The consequence would by that the port dies
> completely and with it the only free and released distribution for this
> machines.
Is this really an important problem?
D
On Aug 26, "Giacomo A. Catenazzi" wrote:
> 5) We create a new free database.
> I don't think is too difficult, and I think we would have support
Sure, a database which can associate an IP address with a country 90% of
the time will be easy to create and if widely used in a few years maybe
will be
glib: do not run udev-acl unless glib is
* installed.
* Stop copying /etc/udev/rules.d/ in the initramfs.
* Renamed some rules files for uniformity with other distributions:
50-udev.rules => 50-udev-default.rules,
95-late.rules => 95-udev-late.rules.
-- Marco d'Itri
On Aug 11, "Giacomo A. Catenazzi" wrote:
> uinput is "input from userspace", so no hardware.
> But probably CONFIG_INPUT_UINPUT must be set "y" on debian kernels.
This is not so obvious. Looks like you should load the module from the
init script (and please do not bother removing it on shutdown,
On Aug 11, "Giacomo A. Catenazzi" wrote:
> - How to handle the common case: keyboard is already attached
> (daemon is in /usr filesystem), with udev.
cd /lib/udev/
. ./hotplug.functions
wait_for_file /dev/log
> - How to load uinput module? Actually I modprobe and I pool
I expect that it woul
On Jul 28, Giacomo Catenazzi wrote:
> - squeeze+1: true upstart: move all scripts to a event based system
How do you plan to remove insserv once it becomes essential?
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Jul 28, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> " Insserv will become essential together with sysv-rc, and is not
> supposed to be simple to remove any more. Dependency based boot
> sequencing is going to become the default and suppoted boot sequencing
> method. I'll remove the option to disable it. "
This i
On Jul 06, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Some a11y people asked how to very easily remaster ISOs so as to append
> parameters to the kernel command line, to e.g. setup the braille
> configuration once for good before burning a CD. I've prepared a small
> crude script to do that on
This begs for a simp
The tcpd/paranoid-mode debconf key enables a "default deny"
configuration for tcpd. Does anybody use it?
I think it should be removed to simplify the package and reduce
confusions (many services nowadays are not subject to libwrap's
access control).
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Di
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Marco d'Itri"
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/hotplug/udev-extras.git;a=summary
It will be uploaded next month, I expect that it will not differ much
from the Ubuntu package.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Jun 11, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> The more I read about this [DEP5], the more I get the feeling that it is
> only pushed by people who never maintained large source packages (that
> can change rapidly)
And/or like to spend more time arguing technicalities than doing actual
work.
DEP5 is wasteful c
901 - 1000 of 1926 matches
Mail list logo
