Brian Nash wrote:
> Regardless of whether John is a troll, this list seems to be tearing
> itself apart at the slightest provocation.
> Perhaps people here are more stressed than they let on.
> Perhaps _certain people_ should cut them some slack.
I read that you are appealing for moderation, whi
Regardless of whether John is a troll, this list seems to be tearing
itself apart at the slightest provocation.
Perhaps people here are more stressed than they let on.
Perhaps _certain people_ should cut them some slack.
On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 08:16:09PM +, Rowland Penny wrote:
On 21/12/15
Mitt Green writes:
> You miss my point. I am trying to deliver
> the message that it is in my opinion
> unacceptable for people to use oath and insults in
> public. Doesn't matter in a pub, in a shop,
> in a mailing list, in a class, in a street, whatever.
> It can be acceptable in gangsta rap, i
>Our project is developing an alternative, not providing space for debate
That's why I'd like to end this discussion.
>Please let us know if you ever find out spaces where unbiased debate on
>systemd can take place, some people here and among them myself may be
>able to contribute then.
Sure. B
On 21/12/15 20:01, Mitt Green wrote:
Rowland Penny wrote:
I am beginning to think this may be aimed squarely at me, if so, then
come out and say so. I think Mitt may have taken exception to the word 'moron'
[...]
It was addressed to everyone here. You have taken a few chances here
trying to
dear Mitt,
On Mon, 21 Dec 2015, Mitt Green wrote:
> Rowland Penny wrote:
>
> >I am beginning to think this may be aimed squarely at me, if so, then
> >come out and say so. I think Mitt may have taken exception to the
> >word 'moron' [...]
>
> It was addressed to everyone here. You have taken
Rowland Penny wrote:
>I am beginning to think this may be aimed squarely at me, if so, then
>come out and say so. I think Mitt may have taken exception to the word 'moron'
>[...]
It was addressed to everyone here. You have taken a few chances here
trying to insult John Hughes, John being accus
On 21/12/15 14:30, Mitt Green wrote:
I've been talking a lot about courtesy in the community.
It is certainly the biggest thing Debian lacks (and
some mates from outside lack it as well, check my post here:
http://www.linux.org/threads/random-thoughts-on-linux-and-open-source-movement.7452/)
I m
Good evening,
2015-12-21 18:49 GMT+01:00, Mitt Green :
> Linus, Lennart, Theo de Raadt, they are all
> criticised for using inappropriate language.
> Debian is also blamed for lacking a little discipline
> in the public mailing lists.
Probably is the common, clickbait-polluted, sense.
*I* blame t
Rainer ,
You miss my point. I am trying to deliver
the message that it is in my opinion
unacceptable for people to use oath and insults in
public. Doesn't matter in a pub, in a shop,
in a mailing list, in a class, in a street, whatever.
It can be acceptable in gangsta rap, in rednecks
societies
Mitt Green writes:
>>As additional clarification: I didn't mean to suggest that Mitt Green
>
>>was seriously contemplating to get his battle axe ready to chop somone's
>>foul head off because of "use of four letter words in public", just
>>highlight that one should be very careful wrt reading '[ir
>As additional clarification: I didn't mean to suggest that Mitt Green
>was seriously contemplating to get his battle axe ready to chop somone's
>foul head off because of "use of four letter words in public", just
>highlight that one should be very careful wrt reading '[irrational]
>aggression' i
Rainer Weikusat writes:
> Mitt Green writes:
>> I've been talking a lot about courtesy in the community.
>> It is certainly the biggest thing Debian lacks (and
>> some mates from outside lack it as well, check my post here:
>> http://www.linux.org/threads/random-thoughts-on-linux-and-open-source-
Mitt Green writes:
> I've been talking a lot about courtesy in the community.
> It is certainly the biggest thing Debian lacks (and
> some mates from outside lack it as well, check my post here:
> http://www.linux.org/threads/random-thoughts-on-linux-and-open-source-movement.7452/)
>
> I must admi
I've been talking a lot about courtesy in the community.
It is certainly the biggest thing Debian lacks (and
some mates from outside lack it as well, check my post here:
http://www.linux.org/threads/random-thoughts-on-linux-and-open-source-movement.7452/)
I must admit that I *hate* when people use
On 20/12/15 13:20, Adam Borowski wrote:
On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 12:21:11PM +0100, John Hughes wrote:
On 20/12/15 11:18, Adam Borowski wrote:
Package: libpam-systemd
[...]
Depends: libc6 (>= 2.17), libpam0g (>= 0.99.7.1), libselinux1 (>= 1.32),
systemd (= 228-2), libpam-runtime (>= 1.0.1-6), d
On 12/20/2015 08:56 PM, Hendrik Boom wrote:
systemd-shim does not depend on systemd, and it conflicts with
systemd. You cannot install both, as claimed by John Hughes.
apt-cache rdepends systemd-shim
systemd-shim
Reverse Depends:
systemd-shim:i386
systemd:i386
|xfce4-session
systemd
|l
On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 02:56:48PM -0500, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> > Please reread what I pasted again. There's a hard dependency on systemd.
> > And libpam-systemd is the only real user of systemd-shim.
>
> To achieve some clarity I performed a few experiments using
> user-mode aptitude on my alph
On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 01:20:58PM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 12:21:11PM +0100, John Hughes wrote:
> > On 20/12/15 11:18, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > >On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 10:12:05AM +0100, John Hughes wrote:
> > >>
> > >>Huh? systemd-shim is a tool for using libbpam-sys
On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 12:21:11PM +0100, John Hughes wrote:
> On 20/12/15 11:18, Adam Borowski wrote:
> >On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 10:12:05AM +0100, John Hughes wrote:
> >>
> >>Huh? systemd-shim is a tool for using libbpam-systemd (which Gnome depends
> >>on) without systemd being *installed*
> >>
On 20/12/15 11:18, Adam Borowski wrote:
On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 10:12:05AM +0100, John Hughes wrote:
Huh? systemd-shim is a tool for using libbpam-systemd (which Gnome depends
on) without systemd being *installed*
In fact it *breaks* systemd, you can't have them both installed.
Package: libp
On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 10:12:05AM +0100, John Hughes wrote:
> On 19/12/15 17:28, Adam Borowski wrote:
> >
> >Systemd-shim is a tool for running _systemd_ without it being pid 1.
> >It's useless without systemd.
> >
>
> Huh? systemd-shim is a tool for using libbpam-systemd (which Gnome depends
>
On 19/12/15 17:28, Adam Borowski wrote:
Systemd-shim is a tool for running _systemd_ without it being pid 1.
It's useless without systemd.
Huh? systemd-shim is a tool for using libbpam-systemd (which Gnome
depends on) without systemd being *installed*
In fact it *breaks* systemd, you can'
Looking back the past, the precursor of systemd chaos was replacement of
ALSA with pulseaudio that caused headache to many innocent users from
Debian 6.0 to 7.0. I tried to use buggy pulseaudio for months but went
back to ALSA.
Systemd built-in Debian Jessie was a disaster.
How many users are
On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 11:02:49 +
Rowland Penny wrote:
> Will somebody please do what debian does when somebody says systemd
> is bad on their mailing list -- Ban him!
>
> Rowland
Calling Don Armstrong. Calling Don Armstrong. Don, we need you!
:-)
SteveT
Steve Litt
November 2015 featured
On Sat, Dec 19, 2015 at 12:46:21PM +0100, John Hughes wrote:
> On 19/12/15 12:02, Rowland Penny wrote:
> >Look, you troll, If you 'apt-get remove systemd' on debian, it will
> >remove Gnome or Mate, I know I tried. Anything that does this, is
> >*BAD* in my books.
>
> You're doing it wrong.
>
> h
On Sat, 12/19/15, John Hughes wrote:
Subject: Re: [DNG] Our friendly community
To: dng@lists.dyne.org
Date: Saturday, December 19, 2015, 6:05 AM
On 19/12/15 12:54, Rowland Penny wrote:
> Firstly, *never* email me directly.
Sorry, pressed wrong button in crappy thunderbird interf
On 12/19/2015 02:45 PM, John Hughes wrote:
And all the little no-systemd irritations are fixed? hibernation/suspend
and so on?
I don't know...you can try for yourself.. :)
BTW, I think that list of "little no-systemd irritations.." is much
shorter than list of systemd irritations ;)
Why is
On 19/12/15 14:34, Dragan FOSS wrote:
On 12/19/2015 01:05 PM, John Hughes wrote:
people who don't want to use systemd are forced into running broken
systems, so I would like to see useful work towards making it possible
to easily run alternatives to systemd.
You're obviously ignorant :)
Appa
On 12/19/2015 01:05 PM, John Hughes wrote:
people who don't want to use systemd are forced into running broken
systems, so I would like to see useful work towards making it possible
to easily run alternatives to systemd.
You're obviously ignorant :)
Rock-solid Debian-jessie-based system withou
John Hughes writes:
> On 18/12/15 15:50, Mitt Green wrote:
>>> It's a library whose sole purpose is to make sure that
>>> packages *don't* depend on
>>> systemd.
>> So, you are saying that libsystemd0 is harmless and it
>> doesn't mean anything unless you install systemd, systemd-sysv and so on?
>
On 19/12/15 12:47, KatolaZ wrote:
On Sat, Dec 19, 2015 at 11:02:49AM +, Rowland Penny wrote:
[cut]
Look, you troll, If you 'apt-get remove systemd' on debian, it will
remove Gnome or Mate, I know I tried. Anything that does this, is
*BAD* in my books.
It also removes cups and many other
On 19/12/15 12:54, Rowland Penny wrote:
On 19/12/15 11:45, John Hughes wrote:
On 19/12/15 12:02, Rowland Penny wrote:
Look, you troll, If you 'apt-get remove systemd' on debian, it will
remove Gnome or Mate, I know I tried. Anything that does this, is
*BAD* in my books.
You're doing it wro
Red Hat is Novell in 2010s.
Compare: both had deals with Microsoft,
both try to take control over Linux, controversial decisions of both
were and still are highly criticised in the community, both are companies
developing enterprise solutions. Let's see what Red Hat controls:
rpm, GNOME, NetworkMa
On 19/12/15 11:45, John Hughes wrote:
On 19/12/15 12:02, Rowland Penny wrote:
Look, you troll, If you 'apt-get remove systemd' on debian, it will
remove Gnome or Mate, I know I tried. Anything that does this, is
*BAD* in my books.
You're doing it wrong.
http://without-systemd.org/wiki/inde
On Sat, Dec 19, 2015 at 11:02:49AM +, Rowland Penny wrote:
[cut]
>
> Look, you troll, If you 'apt-get remove systemd' on debian, it will
> remove Gnome or Mate, I know I tried. Anything that does this, is
> *BAD* in my books.
>
It also removes cups and many other things, for that matter. W
On 19/12/15 12:02, Rowland Penny wrote:
Look, you troll, If you 'apt-get remove systemd' on debian, it will
remove Gnome or Mate, I know I tried. Anything that does this, is
*BAD* in my books.
You're doing it wrong.
http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/How_to_remove_systemd_from_a_Debian
On 19/12/15 10:53, John Hughes wrote:
On 19/12/15 11:28, Rowland Penny wrote:
On 19/12/15 10:21, John Hughes wrote:
On 18/12/15 19:40, Steve Litt wrote:
most of [ JH's posts ] tended to say "libsystemd0 isn't that bad",
I don't think it's that bad, and, despite my asking nobody can tell
m
On 19/12/15 11:28, Rowland Penny wrote:
On 19/12/15 10:21, John Hughes wrote:
On 18/12/15 19:40, Steve Litt wrote:
most of [ JH's posts ] tended to say "libsystemd0 isn't that bad",
I don't think it's that bad, and, despite my asking nobody can tell
me why it is.
I will give you a good r
On 19/12/15 10:21, John Hughes wrote:
On 18/12/15 19:40, Steve Litt wrote:
On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 17:39:26 +0100
John Hughes wrote:
On 18/12/15 17:18, Mitt Green wrote:
No, the actual work on packages that remove libsystemd0 dependency.
I've done quite of it for my machine. Notable examples inc
On 18/12/15 15:50, Mitt Green wrote:
It's a library whose sole purpose is to make sure that
packages *don't* depend on
systemd.
So, you are saying that libsystemd0 is harmless and it
doesn't mean anything unless you install systemd, systemd-sysv and so on?
Exactly.
On 18/12/15 19:40, Steve Litt wrote:
On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 17:39:26 +0100
John Hughes wrote:
On 18/12/15 17:18, Mitt Green wrote:
No, the actual work on packages that remove libsystemd0 dependency.
I've done quite of it for my machine. Notable examples include
angband repositories apart from De
Le 18/12/2015 17:39, John Hughes a écrit :
But why? What badness does libsystemd0 do?
It's poluting the depending packages, the repository, and apt
cache. And it can only be built from upstream systemd source, which
means it's imposed on you in some way, even if you don't want it.
On Fri, 12/18/15, Arthur Marsh wrote:
Subject: Re: [DNG] Our friendly community
To: dng@lists.dyne.org
Date: Friday, December 18, 2015, 9:08 PM
Steve Litt wrote on 19/12/15 04:17:
> On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 11:22:33 +0100
> Didier Kryn wrote:
>
>>> "I strongly recomm
Steve Litt wrote on 19/12/15 04:17:
On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 11:22:33 +0100
Didier Kryn wrote:
"I strongly recommend that the people who cannot live with
libsystemd0 installed on their systems leave Debian, because their
life is going to suck more and more as we will integrate it in
every important
Steve Litt writes:
> On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 17:39:26 +0100
> John Hughes wrote:
>
>> On 18/12/15 17:18, Mitt Green wrote:
>> >
>> > No, the actual work on packages that remove libsystemd0 dependency.
>> > I've done quite of it for my machine. Notable examples include
>> > angband repositories apart
On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 17:39:26 +0100
John Hughes wrote:
> On 18/12/15 17:18, Mitt Green wrote:
> >
> > No, the actual work on packages that remove libsystemd0 dependency.
> > I've done quite of it for my machine. Notable examples include
> > angband repositories apart from Devuan's own. Adam made a
Rainer Weikusat writes:
> Tomasz Torcz writes:
>> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 04:27:32PM +, Rainer Weikusat wrote:
>>> >> you'll note that the
>>> >>
>>> >> if (init_is_systemd)F {
>>> >> do some systemd stuff;
>>> >> } else {
>>> >> /* syslog(LOG_EMERG, "ESYADMINDEPRECATED!!!"); */
>>> >> }
>>
On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 17:06:43 +0100
John Hughes wrote:
> > I previously thought that Devuan aim was to remove
> > *any* of systemd components.
>
> Funny, I thought Devuan was about choice.
Yes and no. This was discussed several months ago.
A huge priority of Devuan is to allow choice. Howev
Tomasz Torcz writes:
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 04:27:32PM +, Rainer Weikusat wrote:
>> >> you'll note that the
>> >>
>> >> if (init_is_systemd)F {
>> >> do some systemd stuff;
>> >> } else {
>> >> /* syslog(LOG_EMERG, "ESYADMINDEPRECATED!!!"); */
>> >> }
>> >>
>> >> is nothing but "system
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 04:27:32PM +, Rainer Weikusat wrote:
> >> you'll note that the
> >>
> >> if (init_is_systemd)F {
> >>do some systemd stuff;
> >> } else {
> >>/* syslog(LOG_EMERG, "ESYADMINDEPRECATED!!!"); */
> >> }
> >>
> >> is nothing but "systemd support code added to some pac
On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 15:37:56 +0300
Mitt Green wrote:
> KatolaZ wrote:
>
> >Sure, but you would agree that rebuilding an increasing number of
> >infected packages in Devuan from upstream would mean a great deal of
> >unnecessary work...
>
>
> It may be unnecessary, that's why I see a couple
On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 11:22:33 +0100
Didier Kryn wrote:
> > "I strongly recommend that the people who cannot live with
> > libsystemd0 installed on their systems leave Debian, because their
> > life is going to suck more and more as we will integrate it in
> > every important daemon after jessie wi
On Fri, 12/18/15, John Hughes wrote:
Subject: Re: [DNG] Our friendly community
To: dng@lists.dyne.org
Date: Friday, December 18, 2015, 11:27 AM
On 18/12/15 18:06, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> Indeed, both are true. Devuan is about choice. Since Debian is quite
> clearly providing the alter
On 18/12/15 18:06, Hendrik Boom wrote:
Indeed, both are true. Devuan is about choice. Since Debian is quite
clearly providing the alternative of using systemd,
And the alternative of *not* using systemd.
the main effort here is to provide the alternative of not using systemd.
The main part
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 05:06:43PM +0100, John Hughes wrote:
> On 18/12/15 16:51, Mitt Green wrote:
>
> > I previously thought that Devuan aim was to remove
> >*any* of systemd components.
>
> Funny, I thought Devuan was about choice.
Indeed, both are true. Devuan is about choice. Since Debian
John Hughes writes:
> On 18/12/15 17:27, Rainer Weikusat wrote:
>> John Hughes writes:
>>
>>>
>>> Can't find the string "ESYADMINDEPRECATED" in the source for
>>> libsystemd0.
>> That's not really surprising as there is no source for
>> 'libsystemd0'. It's a part of systemd,
>>
>> https://package
John Hughes wrote:
>But why? What badness does libsystemd0 do?
A simple principle: let the end user decide what he is going to run.
Why maintainers push libsystemd0 dependency when they can forget it.
Compare: Xfce devs (package maintainers) never required systemd to
run, Mate maintainers req
On 18/12/15 17:54, John Hughes wrote:
You were implicitly claiming that libsystemd would produce errors if
systemd was installed. I was, perhaps flippantly, noting that it
doesn't.
Duh, systemd *wasn't* installed, I meant.
___
Dng mailing list
Dng
On 18/12/15 17:27, Rainer Weikusat wrote:
John Hughes writes:
Can't find the string "ESYADMINDEPRECATED" in the source for
libsystemd0.
That's not really surprising as there is no source for
'libsystemd0'. It's a part of systemd,
https://packages.debian.org/sid/libsystemd0
and the source o
On 18/12/15 17:18, Mitt Green wrote:
No, the actual work on packages that remove libsystemd0 dependency.
I've done quite of it for my machine. Notable examples include
angband repositories apart from Devuan's own. Adam made a big
base removing the dependency.
But why? What badness does libsys
John Hughes writes:
> On 18/12/15 16:25, Rainer Weikusat wrote:
>> If you look at
>>
>> ,
>> | if (init_is_systemd) {
>> |do some systemd stuff;
>> | }
>> | else {
>> |carry on as before;
>> | }
>> `
>>
>> you'll note that the
>>
>> if (init_is_systemd)F {
>> do some syst
John Hughes wrote:
>The only "hype" about libsystemd0 was
>from LKCL who came up with a strange plan to remove it by replacing
>libsystemd0 by a library that would dynamically load libsystemd0,
>probably called lib-not-quite-libsystemd0.
No, the actual work on packages that remove libsystem
On 18/12/15 16:51, Mitt Green wrote:
is nothing but "systemd support code added to some
package".
If it is so, why there is so much hype about it?
Hype about what? libsystemd0? The only "hype" about libsystemd0 was
from LKCL who came up with a strange plan to remove it by replacing
libsyst
>is nothing but "systemd support code added to some
>package".
If it is so, why there is so much hype about it?
I previously thought that Devuan aim was to remove
*any* of systemd components. Does that mean that
we *should* care of this dependency?
As far as I see libsystemd0 is only a shared l
On 18/12/15 16:25, Rainer Weikusat wrote:
If you look at
,
| if (init_is_systemd) {
|do some systemd stuff;
| }
| else {
|carry on as before;
| }
`
you'll note that the
if (init_is_systemd) {
do some systemd stuff;
} else {
/* syslog(LOG_EMERG, "ESYADMINDEPR
John Hughes writes:
In fact he seems to have resigned because he was pissed off
with Ian Jackson's anti-systemd (pro-upstart) agitation.
Rumour had it that he was offgepissed about the manner of discourse, both
in Debian generally at the time and in particular in the systemd
discussion.
Arn
Hi John,
On 18/12/15 16:18, John Hughes wrote:
(I hate Thunderbird -- resending 'cos idiot program chose wrong sender
address*again*)
I use ManJaro Mail :)
Aitor.
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mail
Mitt Green writes:
>>It's a library whose sole purpose is to make sure that
>>packages *don't* depend on
>>systemd.
>
> So, you are saying that libsystemd0 is harmless and it
> doesn't mean anything unless you install systemd, systemd-sysv and so
> on?
If you look at
,
| if (init_is_systemd
John Hughes writes:
> Rainer Weikusat writes:
>> A somewhat loaded "executive summary" of [Russ Allbery's] statement
>> could be: "Considering that systemd was forced into Debian, I
>> really don't see why I would want to bother was all this boring tech
>> stuff any longer".
>
> An improbable rea
On 18/12/15 15:54, Didier Kryn wrote:
Le 18/12/2015 15:35, John Hughes a écrit :
The list is, of course, spurious.
$ cat /etc/debian_version
8.2
$ apt-cache rdepends libsystemd0 | wc -l
74
Sorry, my primary attitude is to believe what people write. So
it's only 74. Does it include chained
On 18/12/15 15:50, Mitt Green wrote:
It's a library whose sole purpose is to make sure that
packages *don't* depend on
systemd.
So, you are saying that libsystemd0 is harmless and it
doesn't mean anything unless you install systemd, systemd-sysv and so on?
Exactly.
(aargh. resending 'cos got
Le 18/12/2015 15:35, John Hughes a écrit :
The list is, of course, spurious.
$ cat /etc/debian_version
8.2
$ apt-cache rdepends libsystemd0 | wc -l
74
Sorry, my primary attitude is to believe what people write. So it's
only 74. Does it include chained dependency?
Every single function
>It's a library whose sole purpose is to make sure that
>packages *don't* depend on
>systemd.
So, you are saying that libsystemd0 is harmless and it
doesn't mean anything unless you install systemd, systemd-sysv and so on?
Mitt
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@
Didier Kryn writes:
The list of 4583 packages now depending on libsysemd0 includes a
lot of packages which definitely have nothing to do with it. The final
lock will happen when the dependency will reach the shells and gcc.
Given the fast contamination, we should expect this pretty soon.
T
Rainer Weikusat writes:
A somewhat loaded "executive summary" of [Russ Allbery's] statement
> could be: > "Considering that systemd was forced into Debian, I
really don't see why
I would want to bother was all this boring tech stuff any longer".
An improbable reading given that Russ voted fo
KatolaZ wrote:
>Sure, but you would agree that rebuilding an increasing number of
>infected packages in Devuan from upstream would mean a great deal of
>unnecessary work...
It may be unnecessary, that's why I see a couple of ways to solve it:
1) Contacting maintainers directly. This can be unf
KatolaZ writes:
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 11:22:33AM +0100, Didier Kryn wrote:
>
> [cut]
>
>> The list of 4583 packages now depending on libsysemd0 includes a
>> lot of packages which definitely have nothing to do with it. The
>> final lock will happen when the dependency will reach the shells
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 11:09:46AM +, Mitt Green wrote:
>
>
> KatolaZ wrote:
>
>
>
> >Just a simple question: how are the BSD folks dealing with
> >those>dependencies in the ports? I beliebe there will never be a running
> >libsystemd0 under FreeBSD, for instance. It might be a good idea
Le 18/12/2015 11:55, Mitt Green a écrit :
Didier Kryn wrote:
The list of 4583 packages now depending on libsystemd0 includes a
lot of packages which definitely have nothing to do with it. The final
lock will happen when the dependency will reach the shells and gcc.
Given the fast contamination
KatolaZ wrote:
>Just a simple question: how are the BSD folks dealing with those>dependencies
>in the ports? I beliebe there will never be a running
>libsystemd0 under FreeBSD, for instance. It might be a good idea to
>"re-port" the ports back into devuan, if you see what I mean...
The pro
Didier Kryn wrote:
>The list of 4583 packages now depending on libsystemd0 includes a
>lot of packages which definitely have nothing to do with it. The final
>lock will happen when the dependency will reach the shells and gcc.
>Given the fast contamination, we should expect this pretty soon.
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 11:22:33AM +0100, Didier Kryn wrote:
[cut]
>
> The list of 4583 packages now depending on libsysemd0 includes a
> lot of packages which definitely have nothing to do with it. The
> final lock will happen when the dependency will reach the shells and
> gcc. Given the f
Le 17/12/2015 20:21, Go Linux a écrit :
Marco d'Itri's response to that post is illuminating:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2015/02/msg00644.html
"I strongly recommend that the people who cannot live with libsystemd0
installed on their systems leave Debian, because their life is going to
On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 13:41:41 -0500, Steve wrote in message
<20151217134141.2284d...@mydesk.domain.cxm>:
> On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 18:28:45 + (UTC)
> Mitt Green wrote:
>
> > > A somewhat loaded "executive summary" of his statement could be:
> > > "Considering that systemd was forced into Debian,
Go Linux writes:
>
> On Thu, 12/17/15, Rainer Weikusat wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: [DNG] Our friendly community
> To: "Dng"
> Date: Thursday, December 17, 2015, 11:46
* On 2015 17 Dec 12:45 -0600, Steve Litt wrote:
> I wonder if Devuan could recruit some of the massive brainpower exiting
> the Debian project?
Did Russ actually leave the project or just the TC. I didn't see
anything recent (past couple of months) that hints at anything. I no
longer follow Plan
> Marco d'Itri's response to that post is illuminating:
>
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2015/02/msg00644.html
>
> "I strongly recommend that the people who cannot live with libsystemd0
> installed on their systems leave Debian, because their life is going to
> suck more and more as we
On Thu, 12/17/15, Rainer Weikusat wrote:
Subject: Re: [DNG] Our friendly community
To: "Dng"
Date: Thursday, December 17, 2015, 11:46 AM
Mitt Green writes:
[...]
Marco d'Itr
On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 18:28:45 + (UTC)
Mitt Green wrote:
> > A somewhat loaded "executive summary" of his statement could be:
> > "Considering that systemd was forced into Debian, I really don't
> > see why I would want to bother was all this boring tech stuff any
> > longer".
>
>
> From wh
> A somewhat loaded "executive summary" of his statement could be:
> "Considering that systemd was forced into Debian, I really don't see why
> I would want to bother was all this boring tech stuff any longer".
From what I've read, the bunch of people resigned (including Ian Jackson)
and all of
Mitt Green writes:
[...]
> I heard Russ Allbery is one of those mates who resigned recently.
> Reasons are unclear to me.
A somewhat loaded "executive summary" of his statement could be:
"Considering that systemd was forced into Debian, I really don't see why
I would want to bother was all thi
Hi,
Not sure how many of you have read this
(https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2015/02/msg00641.html)
I can't really understand the reaction.
Saying people to leave Debian; or how is libselinux related to NSA
these days, as far as I understand SELnux is a kernel module (which I don't
have on
93 matches
Mail list logo
