Marco d'Itri writes (Re: Improving hwclock support in Debian (testing
wanted)):
On Feb 18, Roger Leigh rle...@codelibre.net wrote:
• There are currently two init scripts, hwclockfirst.sh and
hwclock.sh. The reasons for these two originally existing
Why do you still bother with init
On Feb 21, Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk wrote:
Please do not make udev mandatory. There are still refuseniks out
there and I can see why they make that choice.
Statistics show that they are not relevant.
Duplicating code paths has a cost, and it's big when one of them is
never
Hi,
The attached patch against current util-linux cleans up hwclock
handling with the following changes:
• There are currently two init scripts, hwclockfirst.sh and
hwclock.sh. The reasons for these two originally existing
(/etc/localtime not being present until after /usr was
mounted
On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 03:59:23PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
Hi,
The attached patch against current util-linux cleans up hwclock
handling with the following changes:
• Also adds /etc/default/hwclock and hwclock(5) which permit
configuration without editing the initscript, and also
On Feb 18, Roger Leigh rle...@codelibre.net wrote:
• There are currently two init scripts, hwclockfirst.sh and
hwclock.sh. The reasons for these two originally existing
Why do you still bother with init scripts? With very good approximation,
nowadays all systems which need hwclock (i.e. are
On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 08:00:28PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
On Feb 18, Roger Leigh rle...@codelibre.net wrote:
• There are currently two init scripts, hwclockfirst.sh and
hwclock.sh. The reasons for these two originally existing
Why do you still bother with init scripts? With very
6 matches
Mail list logo
