On 28/01/12 12:54, Colin Walters wrote:
Anyways I don't think we're in violent disagreement here, and what I
want to focus on is concrete actions. Vincent, Michael, Milan, as the
people who actually contributed code here - are you guys OK with the
DBus backend work and/or future plans to use sy
Hi,
Le samedi 28 janvier 2012, à 12:54 -0500, Colin Walters a écrit :
> On Sat, 2012-01-28 at 17:34 +, Bastien Nocera wrote:
>
> > I don't think Vincent was surprised, or he really shouldn't have been:
> > https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=654970#c2
> > https://bugzilla.gnome.org/sho
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 15:47 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote:
> requirements and they sometimes change.
>
> We should work together and reach out though to affected parties... and
> IMO well known that I/release team could improve on that. Fortunately
> 3.4 is not out yet.
>
In the interest of better c
Le samedi 28 janvier 2012 à 12:54 -0500, Colin Walters a écrit :
> Anyways I don't think we're in violent disagreement here, and what I
> want to focus on is concrete actions. Vincent, Michael, Milan, as the
> people who actually contributed code here - are you guys OK with the
> DBus backend work
On Sat, 2012-01-28 at 17:34 +, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> I don't think Vincent was surprised, or he really shouldn't have been:
> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=654970#c2
> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=654970#c3
>
> Michael didn't comment on this issue in this thread.
Em Sat, 2012-01-28 às 11:52 -0500, Colin Walters escreveu:
> On Sat, 2012-01-28 at 15:31 +, Bastien Nocera wrote:
>
> > Ubuntu has apparently taken steps to fix the problem, Debian can
> > probably use the same code, and OpenSUSE can use the RPM I made and
> > linked to earlier in the thread a
On Sat, 2012-01-28 at 15:31 +, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> Ubuntu has apparently taken steps to fix the problem, Debian can
> probably use the same code, and OpenSUSE can use the RPM I made and
> linked to earlier in the thread as a basis to fixing the problem.
>
> You call me disrespectful and q
Em Sat, 2012-01-28 às 18:39 +0200, Ionut Biru escreveu:
> On 01/28/2012 06:36 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> > Em Sat, 2012-01-28 às 18:21 +0200, Ionut Biru escreveu:
> >> On 01/28/2012 05:31 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> >
> >>> [1]: I'll repeat once again that Ubuntu, Debian, SUSE and Fedora were
> >
On 01/28/2012 06:36 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> Em Sat, 2012-01-28 às 18:21 +0200, Ionut Biru escreveu:
>> On 01/28/2012 05:31 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote:
>
>>> [1]: I'll repeat once again that Ubuntu, Debian, SUSE and Fedora were
>>> the only supported distros in the old mechanism.
>>>
>>
>> I keep
Em Sat, 2012-01-28 às 18:21 +0200, Ionut Biru escreveu:
> On 01/28/2012 05:31 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> > [1]: I'll repeat once again that Ubuntu, Debian, SUSE and Fedora were
> > the only supported distros in the old mechanism.
> >
>
> I keep seeing this. Add to the list Arch Linux as well.
On 01/28/2012 05:31 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> Em Fri, 2012-01-27 às 09:45 -0500, Colin Walters escreveu:
>> On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 17:49 -0500, Ryan Lortie wrote:
>>> hi Bastien,
>>>
>>> On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 22:38 +, Bastien Nocera wrote:
commit 27fa171efe4179c0a42ec79e0dc501077f042a08
>
Em Fri, 2012-01-27 às 09:45 -0500, Colin Walters escreveu:
> On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 17:49 -0500, Ryan Lortie wrote:
> > hi Bastien,
> >
> > On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 22:38 +, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> > > commit 27fa171efe4179c0a42ec79e0dc501077f042a08
> > > Author: Bastien Nocera
> > > Date: Thu
On Fri, 2012-01-27 at 09:45 -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
> So concretely - how about bringing back the old code and making it
> conditionally compile under a --enable-date-time-backend flag? If you
> want, I can do a patch.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=668851
_
On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 17:49 -0500, Ryan Lortie wrote:
> hi Bastien,
>
> On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 22:38 +, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> > commit 27fa171efe4179c0a42ec79e0dc501077f042a08
> > Author: Bastien Nocera
> > Date: Thu Jan 19 22:33:21 2012 +
> >
> > datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus m
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 03:03:36PM +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
> Another systemd-related change was already mentioned earlier: the
> new --enable-systemd configure flag that removes ConsoleKit support when
> it's used. It cannot really be used for openSUSE (and Mageia, I'd say).
> I want to thank M
Hi,
Le lundi 23 janvier 2012, à 13:02 +0100, Olav Vitters a écrit :
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 10:54:30AM +0100, Frederic Crozat wrote:
> > 2012/1/23 Olav Vitters :
> > > On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 10:14:32AM +0100, Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> > >> Why do you guys insist in making that a Canonical,Ubunt
Bastien Nocera wrote:
> And have a Provides: systemd-services in the systemd RPM. The problem
> isn't exactly insurmontable.
Of course it's not insurmontable, but this thread came to be more
about proper communication than technical solutions.
So far we had 1) the update of the portability matri
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 10:54:30AM +0100, Frederic Crozat wrote:
> 2012/1/23 Olav Vitters :
> > On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 10:14:32AM +0100, Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> >> Why do you guys insist in making that a Canonical,Ubuntu issue?
> >
> > Only that distribution is affected by the functionality chan
On Mon, 2012-01-23 at 10:54 +0100, Frederic Crozat wrote:
> 2012/1/23 Olav Vitters :
> > On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 10:14:32AM +0100, Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> >> Why do you guys insist in making that a Canonical,Ubuntu issue?
> >
> > Only that distribution is affected by the functionality change righ
On vie, 2012-01-20 at 22:56 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Fri, 20.01.12 08:47, Ryan Lortie (de...@desrt.ca) wrote:
>
> >
> > hi Bastien,
> >
> > On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 12:36 +, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> > > No, the distributions/systems that choose not to use systemd will have
> > > to
2012/1/23 Olav Vitters :
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 10:14:32AM +0100, Sebastien Bacher wrote:
>> Why do you guys insist in making that a Canonical,Ubuntu issue?
>
> Only that distribution is affected by the functionality change right
> (relying on API that atm is only provided by systemd)? All the o
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 10:14:32AM +0100, Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> Why do you guys insist in making that a Canonical,Ubuntu issue?
Only that distribution is affected by the functionality change right
(relying on API that atm is only provided by systemd)? All the other
distributions have systemd,
Le 20/01/2012 23:08, Lennart Poettering a écrit :
You know, your complaining would be a bit more believable if Google
wouldn't find this for us:
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/desktop-p-systemd-packagekit
So, the problem set has been known for a while, a number of Canonical
deskt
Hi all!
I took some time and improved PortabilityMatrix in a way that I find
easier to understand and that makes more clear which part of the stack
are supported by different system. If you like it, feel free to use it
as the official version:
https://live.gnome.org/PortabilityMatrix/Improved
Sh
On Sat, 2012-01-21 at 01:07 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Fri, 20.01.12 17:08, Ted Gould (t...@gould.cx) wrote:
> > > I already maintain a ton of stuff, and I try to keep maintenance burden
> > > and bureaucracy small for myself. Hence the Wiki, and not a complex
> > > standards process and
On Fri, 20.01.12 17:08, Ted Gould (t...@gould.cx) wrote:
> > I already maintain a ton of stuff, and I try to keep maintenance burden
> > and bureaucracy small for myself. Hence the Wiki, and not a complex
> > standards process and a git repo. All API versioning we need should be
> > done within th
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 23:48 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Fri, 20.01.12 16:29, Ted Gould (t...@gould.cx) wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 23:20 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > > On Fri, 20.01.12 08:59, Ted Gould (t...@gould.cx) wrote:
> > > > It seems to me that this would be a good us
On Fri, 20.01.12 16:29, Ted Gould (t...@gould.cx) wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 23:20 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > On Fri, 20.01.12 08:59, Ted Gould (t...@gould.cx) wrote:
> > > It seems to me that this would be a good usage of Freedesktop. I'd be
> > > happy to maintain such a repositor
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 23:20 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Fri, 20.01.12 08:59, Ted Gould (t...@gould.cx) wrote:
> > It seems to me that this would be a good usage of Freedesktop. I'd be
> > happy to maintain such a repository if people would be willing to use
> > it.
>
> Yeah, it's a grea
On Fri, 20.01.12 15:25, Bastien Nocera (had...@hadess.net) wrote:
> > Then we need to clearly communicate what we expect distributors to
> > provide. What systemd interfaces are we allowed to depend on without
> > asking?
>
> The systemd interfaces that don't rely on systemd being the init system
On Fri, 20.01.12 09:39, Ted Gould (t...@gould.cx) wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 10:22 -0500, Ryan Lortie wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 08:59 -0600, Ted Gould wrote:
> > > I think that this would be more apparent if the DBus interface
> > > descriptions were maintained outside of the systemd co
On Fri, 20.01.12 08:59, Ted Gould (t...@gould.cx) wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 12:37 +, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
> > the dependency is not on systemd - it's on a DBus API. systemd provides
> > one implementation of that DBus API.
>
> I think that this would be more apparent if the DBus interf
On Fri, 20.01.12 15:06, Sebastien Bacher (seb...@ubuntu.com) wrote:
>
> Le 20/01/2012 13:00, Olav Vitters a écrit :
> >It is called systemd, and it is NOT a dependency. What we depend on is
> >a few simple dbus APIs. If an OS doesn't implement those APIs, certain
> >functionality won't work. Thes
On Fri, 20.01.12 21:50, Steve Frécinaux (nudr...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
> On 01/20/2012 06:33 PM, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> >Try to think of it as a freedesktop standard for time and date (like
> >org.fdo.Notifications). It even uses the same DBus namespace! Once a
> >provider is implemented (by por
On Fri, 20.01.12 10:29, Ryan Lortie (de...@desrt.ca) wrote:
> As mentioned above -- Lennart has no intention of making it easy to use
> his code outside of systemd (and I don't blame him). This is not a
> matter of some simple packaging -- more like reimplementing a D-Bus
> interface in a new cod
On Fri, 20.01.12 08:47, Ryan Lortie (de...@desrt.ca) wrote:
>
> hi Bastien,
>
> On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 12:36 +, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> > No, the distributions/systems that choose not to use systemd will have
> > to provide a compatible D-Bus service.
>
> This is what I guessed you'd say.
>
On 01/20/2012 06:33 PM, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
Try to think of it as a freedesktop standard for time and date (like
org.fdo.Notifications). It even uses the same DBus namespace! Once a
provider is implemented (by porting timedated or whatever) it can be
reused everywhere.
It might be wise to j
On 20 Jan 2012, at 17:21, Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> Le 20/01/2012 17:50, Bastien Nocera a écrit :
>> In about 40 minutes, I created a binary RPM[1] that contains the 3
>> services we care about in GNOME from the systemd Fedora package. I
>> believe you do something similar.
> Thanks, that works b
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 10:49 PM, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
> On 20 January 2012 17:12, Michael Biebl wrote:
>> It's unfortunately not as simple as that as far as Debian is concerned
>> or any other non-Linux distro. systemd is Linux-only. The
>> aforementioned components timedated, hostnamed and lo
Le 20/01/2012 17:50, Bastien Nocera a écrit :
In about 40 minutes, I created a binary RPM[1] that contains the 3
services we care about in GNOME from the systemd Fedora package. I
believe you do something similar.
Thanks, that works but is not really optiomal (i.e that could easily
lead to a non
hi;
On 20 January 2012 17:12, Michael Biebl wrote:
> It's unfortunately not as simple as that as far as Debian is concerned
> or any other non-Linux distro. systemd is Linux-only. The
> aforementioned components timedated, hostnamed and localed can't be
> compiled on non-Linux systems.
this hasn
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 04:00:47PM +0100, Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> The current way of doing things just seem far to be professional,
> GNOME can probably do much better on communicating their requirement
> and documenting them.
I said that as well in the bit you didn't quote + in other emails.
-
Am 20. Januar 2012 17:50 schrieb Bastien Nocera :
> On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 10:29 -0500, Ryan Lortie wrote:
>
>> > and get them to package up the missing
>> > bits. An afternoon's work, and no need to scream bloody murder.
>>
>> As mentioned above -- Lennart has no intention of making it easy to use
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 10:29 -0500, Ryan Lortie wrote:
> > and get them to package up the missing
> > bits. An afternoon's work, and no need to scream bloody murder.
>
> As mentioned above -- Lennart has no intention of making it easy to use
> his code outside of systemd (and I don't blame him).
Le 20/01/2012 17:28, Matthias Clasen a écrit :
How about: distributors should keep on top of what's happening with
the things they are distributing ?
Right, that's one possibility (and basically what it's happening
nowadays), but it makes the distributors' job harder and so increases
the liken
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> Le 20/01/2012 15:49, Bastien Nocera a écrit :
>
>
> This wiki page is something but it would be better if GNOME could:
> - do public announces a cycle in advance of what new system requirements
> will be added to let distributors adapt
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 10:22 -0500, Ryan Lortie wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 08:59 -0600, Ted Gould wrote:
> > I think that this would be more apparent if the DBus interface
> > descriptions were maintained outside of the systemd codebase.
>
>http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/t
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 14:30 +, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> This particular change was mentioned nearly a year ago on this very same
> list. It's not my fault Ubuntu (in this particular case) didn't take the
> hint to start packaging the relevant D-Bus services, or rewriting them
> to fit their use.
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 10:12 -0500, Shaun McCance wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 12:36 +, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 17:49 -0500, Ryan Lortie wrote:
> > > hi Bastien,
> > >
> > > On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 22:38 +, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> > > > commit 27fa171efe4179c0a42ec79
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 08:59 -0600, Ted Gould wrote:
> I think that this would be more apparent if the DBus interface
> descriptions were maintained outside of the systemd codebase.
http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/timedated
I won't comment on if you accept this as being suffici
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 12:36 +, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 17:49 -0500, Ryan Lortie wrote:
> > hi Bastien,
> >
> > On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 22:38 +, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> > > commit 27fa171efe4179c0a42ec79e0dc501077f042a08
> > > Author: Bastien Nocera
> > > Date: Thu Ja
Le 20/01/2012 15:49, Bastien Nocera a écrit :
Most of them are listed in the page that Olav pointed to:
https://live.gnome.org/PortabilityMatrix
Not updating it for the latest changes is my mistake.
This wiki page is something but it would be better if GNOME could:
- do public announces a cycl
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 12:37 +, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
> the dependency is not on systemd - it's on a DBus API. systemd provides
> one implementation of that DBus API.
I think that this would be more apparent if the DBus interface
descriptions were maintained outside of the systemd codebase. I
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 09:48 -0500, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
> While writing the extra code that Debian and Ubuntu will need may only
> take a day or a few days' work for you, it's probably beyond my
> abilities.
I don't think it is. Take systemd's tarball, and call it
systemd-services. Package up syst
Le 20/01/2012 15:47, Olav Vitters a écrit :
FWIW and IMO, this is a packaging issue. If you want to provide GNOME
3.4, you'll need to ensure you have the right functionality in your
OS/distribution.
Well, GNOME should start by communicating what are the "right
functionality" and doing it one cyc
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 08:47:28AM -0500, Ryan Lortie wrote:
> Many of our own end-users will still want to install GNOME 3.4 onto
> their Ubuntu systems (myself included). I look forward to the mention
> in our release notes about how they can no longer change their time
> because we wanted to de
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 02:49:01PM +, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> I think that's enough time to implement the functionality.
I'd like to see that distributor-list used when a decision is reached. I
guess this is a task for the release-team.
--
Regards,
Olav
__
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 03:06:45PM +0100, Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> Ok, so as a distributor of GNOME I think that what we (Ubuntu) would
> like to see:
Agree fully.. is what I meant with the other email (which I sent before
reading this one). I think we should put that somewhere in our standard
sc
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 15:06 +0100, Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> Le 20/01/2012 13:00, Olav Vitters a écrit :
> > It is called systemd, and it is NOT a dependency. What we depend on is
> > a few simple dbus APIs. If an OS doesn't implement those APIs, certain
> > functionality won't work. These APIs hav
On 20 January 2012 08:47, Ryan Lortie wrote:
> hi Bastien,
>
> On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 12:36 +, Bastien Nocera wrote:
>> No, the distributions/systems that choose not to use systemd will have
>> to provide a compatible D-Bus service.
>
> This is what I guessed you'd say.
>
>> It can be something
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 08:47 -0500, Ryan Lortie wrote:
> hi Bastien,
>
> On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 12:36 +, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> > No, the distributions/systems that choose not to use systemd will have
> > to provide a compatible D-Bus service.
>
> This is what I guessed you'd say.
Why did you
Le 20/01/2012 13:00, Olav Vitters a écrit :
It is called systemd, and it is NOT a dependency. What we depend on is
a few simple dbus APIs. If an OS doesn't implement those APIs, certain
functionality won't work. These APIs have been implemented in systemd,
but they can (and are being) implemented
hi Bastien,
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 12:36 +, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> No, the distributions/systems that choose not to use systemd will have
> to provide a compatible D-Bus service.
This is what I guessed you'd say.
> It can be something "extracted" from systemd, or something new and
> revived
On Fri, 20.01.12 15:13, Ionut Biru (io...@archlinux.ro) wrote:
> I know the discussion and if I'm not wrong, the overall conclusion was a
> big no no no to systemd.
>
> Also Lennart promised that providers can be used standalone and
> absolutely no effort was made to ensure that and packaging sep
On 01/20/2012 03:06 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 13:23 +0200, Ionut Biru wrote:
>> On 01/20/2012 10:34 AM, Olav Vitters wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 08:04:36AM +, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
On 20 January 2012 03:25, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>>> Now that gno
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 13:57 +0100, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 12:37:44PM +, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 09:34 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 08:04:36AM +, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
> > > > On 20 January 2012 03:25, Lennart Po
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 13:23 +0200, Ionut Biru wrote:
> On 01/20/2012 10:34 AM, Olav Vitters wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 08:04:36AM +, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
> >> On 20 January 2012 03:25, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > Now that gnome-control-center uses systemd's date & time
> >
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 01:57:37PM +0100, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 12:37:44PM +, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 09:34 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 08:04:36AM +, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
> > > > On 20 January 2012 03:25, Len
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 12:37:44PM +, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 09:34 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 08:04:36AM +, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
> > > On 20 January 2012 03:25, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > > >> > Now that gnome-control-center uses
On 2012-01-20 at 13:23, Ionut Biru wrote:
> Are there plans to provide a systemd-compatible backend for those
> systems that cannot run systemd?
> >>>
> >>> IIRC ubuntu did some work there:
> >>>
> >>> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/desktop-p-systemd-packagekit
> >>
> >> I
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 09:34 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 08:04:36AM +, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
> > On 20 January 2012 03:25, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > >> > Now that gnome-control-center uses systemd's date & time
> > >> > mechanism[1],
> > >> > we don't need
On vie, 2012-01-20 at 04:25 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Thu, 19.01.12 17:49, Ryan Lortie (de...@desrt.ca) wrote:
>
> >
> > hi Bastien,
> >
> > On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 22:38 +, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> > > commit 27fa171efe4179c0a42ec79e0dc501077f042a08
> > > Author: Bastien Nocera
>
On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 17:49 -0500, Ryan Lortie wrote:
> hi Bastien,
>
> On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 22:38 +, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> > commit 27fa171efe4179c0a42ec79e0dc501077f042a08
> > Author: Bastien Nocera
> > Date: Thu Jan 19 22:33:21 2012 +
> >
> > datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus m
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 01:23:23PM +0200, Ionut Biru wrote:
> > I guess we need to review, expand and announce the following again:
> > https://live.gnome.org/PortabilityMatrix
> >
>
> I don't want to sound picky, but since when SystemD is a blessed dependency?
It is called systemd, and it is NO
On 01/20/2012 10:34 AM, Olav Vitters wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 08:04:36AM +, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
>> On 20 January 2012 03:25, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> Now that gnome-control-center uses systemd's date & time mechanism[1],
> we don't need to ship our own mechanism f
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 08:04:36AM +, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
> On 20 January 2012 03:25, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> >> > Now that gnome-control-center uses systemd's date & time
> >> > mechanism[1],
> >> > we don't need to ship our own mechanism for that purpose. This also
> >> >
hi;
On 20 January 2012 03:25, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>> > Now that gnome-control-center uses systemd's date & time mechanism[1],
>> > we don't need to ship our own mechanism for that purpose. This also
>> > removes the last user of dbus-glib in gnome-settings-daemon [2].
>>
>> Are
On Thu, 19.01.12 17:49, Ryan Lortie (de...@desrt.ca) wrote:
>
> hi Bastien,
>
> On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 22:38 +, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> > commit 27fa171efe4179c0a42ec79e0dc501077f042a08
> > Author: Bastien Nocera
> > Date: Thu Jan 19 22:33:21 2012 +
> >
> > datetime: Remove dateti
hi Bastien,
On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 22:38 +, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> commit 27fa171efe4179c0a42ec79e0dc501077f042a08
> Author: Bastien Nocera
> Date: Thu Jan 19 22:33:21 2012 +
>
> datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
>
> Now that gnome-control-center uses systemd's dat
79 matches
Mail list logo
